Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of HMRC’s approach to dealing with disguised remuneration schemes.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
This government recognised that concerns continued to be raised about the loan charge and that some felt strongly that it had not been handled appropriately.
The Government therefore commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann. As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet settled with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
At the Budget, the Government announced action to tackle tax avoidance by umbrella companies, where most disguised remuneration now takes place. The Government is introducing legislation, effective from April 2026, to make recruitment agencies using umbrella companies legally responsible for accounting for PAYE on workers’ pay. Where there is no agency in the supply chain, this responsibility will fall to the end client.
The Government is also introducing new powers in Finance Bill 2025/26 to close in on promoters of marketed tax avoidance and the other professionals who market or enable tax avoidance schemes.
These new powers will go further and include more criminal sanctions. This shows the Government’s clear determination to close in on the few remaining promoters by strengthening deterrents and introducing significant additional consequences for promoters who continue promoting tax avoidance schemes.
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has brought into charge more than £4 billion from its work tackling disguised remuneration.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will offer the same settlement terms that will be provided in the settlement opportunity resulting from the implementation of the McCann Review to those that have already settled with HMRC.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
This government recognised that concerns continued to be raised about the loan charge and that some felt strongly that it had not been handled appropriately.
The Government therefore commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann. As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet settled with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
At the Budget, the Government announced action to tackle tax avoidance by umbrella companies, where most disguised remuneration now takes place. The Government is introducing legislation, effective from April 2026, to make recruitment agencies using umbrella companies legally responsible for accounting for PAYE on workers’ pay. Where there is no agency in the supply chain, this responsibility will fall to the end client.
The Government is also introducing new powers in Finance Bill 2025/26 to close in on promoters of marketed tax avoidance and the other professionals who market or enable tax avoidance schemes.
These new powers will go further and include more criminal sanctions. This shows the Government’s clear determination to close in on the few remaining promoters by strengthening deterrents and introducing significant additional consequences for promoters who continue promoting tax avoidance schemes.
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has brought into charge more than £4 billion from its work tackling disguised remuneration.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the value-for-money to the taxpayer of the Loan Charge.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
This government recognised that concerns continued to be raised about the loan charge and that some felt strongly that it had not been handled appropriately.
The Government therefore commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann. As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet settled with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
At the Budget, the Government announced action to tackle tax avoidance by umbrella companies, where most disguised remuneration now takes place. The Government is introducing legislation, effective from April 2026, to make recruitment agencies using umbrella companies legally responsible for accounting for PAYE on workers’ pay. Where there is no agency in the supply chain, this responsibility will fall to the end client.
The Government is also introducing new powers in Finance Bill 2025/26 to close in on promoters of marketed tax avoidance and the other professionals who market or enable tax avoidance schemes.
These new powers will go further and include more criminal sanctions. This shows the Government’s clear determination to close in on the few remaining promoters by strengthening deterrents and introducing significant additional consequences for promoters who continue promoting tax avoidance schemes.
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has brought into charge more than £4 billion from its work tackling disguised remuneration.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of changes to employer National Insurance contributions on employment levels in (a) the voluntary sector, (b) charities and (c) heritage organisations.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government recognises the important role charities play in our society and has made it a priority to reset the relationship with civil society by developing the Civil Society Covenant.
A Tax Information and Impact Note (TIIN) was published alongside the introduction of the Bill containing the changes to employer National Insurance contributions. The TIIN set out the impact of the policy on the exchequer, the economic impacts of the policy, and the impacts on individuals, businesses, civil society organisations, as well as an overview of the equality impacts.
The Office for Budget Responsibility also published the Economic and Fiscal Outlook (EFO), which set out a detailed forecast of the economy and public finances.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of the increase in employer National Insurance contributions on SMEs in Stratford-on-Avon constituency.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
A Tax Information and Impact Note (TIIN) was published alongside the introduction of the Bill containing the changes to employer NICs. The TIIN sets out the impact of the policy, including on businesses. The Government decided to protect the smallest businesses from the changes to employer NICs by increasing the Employment Allowance from £5,000 to £10,500. This means that this year, 865,000 employers will pay no NICs at all, and more than half of all employers will either gain or will see no change.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will take steps to ensure consumers have access to redress where firms fail to comply with decisions of the Financial Ombudsman Service by (a) creating a compensation fund and (b) strengthening enforcement powers.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
Businesses that are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) are required by its rules to co-operate with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), including by complying with any determination that it may make, if that determination is accepted by the complainant. If a regulated firm fails to comply with a FOS determination, the FOS may refer the firm to the FCA. This may result in the FCA taking further action against firms who fail to comply with the FCA’s rules.
The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 provides the FCA with a range of powers to ensure relevant firms comply with its rules, and to act where firms fail to comply. The government is content that this legislative framework is appropriate and that the FCA has the right tools available to enable it to take action when firms do not comply with regulations.
The FOS does not have powers to directly enforce its determinations through legal proceedings, as its role is to act as an alternative to the courts. However, once the FOS’s determination is accepted by the complainant, it becomes binding on the firm. If a firm fails to comply with a determination, a complainant can enforce it through the courts. This does not require the merits of the case to be considered again by the court.
In cases where a firm fails to comply with a decision due to it failing, affected complainants may be eligible to claim compensation through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what recent assessment she has made of the adequacy of the Financial Conduct Authority’s powers to sanction regulated firms that fail to comply with decisions of the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
Businesses that are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) are required by its rules to co-operate with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), including by complying with any determination that it may make, if that determination is accepted by the complainant. If a regulated firm fails to comply with a FOS determination, the FOS may refer the firm to the FCA. This may result in the FCA taking further action against firms who fail to comply with the FCA’s rules.
The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 provides the FCA with a range of powers to ensure relevant firms comply with its rules, and to act where firms fail to comply. The government is content that this legislative framework is appropriate and that the FCA has the right tools available to enable it to take action when firms do not comply with regulations.
The FOS does not have powers to directly enforce its determinations through legal proceedings, as its role is to act as an alternative to the courts. However, once the FOS’s determination is accepted by the complainant, it becomes binding on the firm. If a firm fails to comply with a determination, a complainant can enforce it through the courts. This does not require the merits of the case to be considered again by the court.
In cases where a firm fails to comply with a decision due to it failing, affected complainants may be eligible to claim compensation through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether customer account closures made while complaints remain unresolved by the Financial Ombudsman Service must be reported to (a) the Financial Conduct Authority, (b) the Financial Ombudsman Service and (c) any other regulatory body.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
In June 2025, the Government legislated to introduce stronger protections for customers in cases of bank account closure.
The measures we have introduced extend the minimum notice period of termination from two months to 90 days and place a new requirement on banks and other providers to give a sufficiently detailed and specific explanation to the customer so they understand why their service is being terminated, subject to certain exceptions. Where providers give a notice of termination to a customer, they must advise the customer on how they can make a complaint and of any right they may have to complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). These changes will take effect for relevant new contracts from 28 April 2026. Guidance on implementing requirements would be a matter for the relevant regulators.
The Financial Conduct Authority’s rules on how the FOS should handle complaints state that ‘The ombudsman will attempt to resolve complaints at the earliest possible stage’. A number of factors may affect the time it takes for the FOS to resolve complaints that are referred to it. In 2023-2024, the FOS resolved over half of its cases within three months.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what guidance her Department has issued for banks on reporting customer account closures while complaints remain unresolved by the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
In June 2025, the Government legislated to introduce stronger protections for customers in cases of bank account closure.
The measures we have introduced extend the minimum notice period of termination from two months to 90 days and place a new requirement on banks and other providers to give a sufficiently detailed and specific explanation to the customer so they understand why their service is being terminated, subject to certain exceptions. Where providers give a notice of termination to a customer, they must advise the customer on how they can make a complaint and of any right they may have to complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). These changes will take effect for relevant new contracts from 28 April 2026. Guidance on implementing requirements would be a matter for the relevant regulators.
The Financial Conduct Authority’s rules on how the FOS should handle complaints state that ‘The ombudsman will attempt to resolve complaints at the earliest possible stage’. A number of factors may affect the time it takes for the FOS to resolve complaints that are referred to it. In 2023-2024, the FOS resolved over half of its cases within three months.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether she has had recent discussions with the Secretary of State for Education on budgets for the devolved adult skills fund.
Answered by Darren Jones - Minister for Intergovernmental Relations
The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Chief Secretary of the Treasury meet regularly with the Secretary of State for Education.
At the Spending Review on 30 October, the Department for Education received a settlement providing total DEL funding of £99.7 billion in 2025-26. The Department is responsible for determining their budgets, including for the Adult Skills Fund, through their Business Planning process. Budgets beyond 2025-26 will be determined at phase 2 of the Spending Review on 11 June.
Achieving growth and breaking down barriers to opportunity are key priorities for this Government. The Adult Skills Fund is a crucial component of both missions helping to provide a foundation for individuals to improve earnings and employment opportunities, and open doors to further learning. This Government is committed to seeing local government empowered and strengthened including through the devolution of adult skills.