Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Written Statement of 14 November 2016, HCWS252, on off-payroll review 2014-15, how many Government contracts which did not allow departments to seek assurance regarding contractors' tax affairs there were by Department; and what proportion of contracts issued in 2014-15 that number represents by Department.

The annex attached to the Written Statement of 14 November 2016 detailing the results of the off-payroll review provides a breakdown of which departments sought assurances on the tax affairs of their contractors earning more than £220 per day for more than six months, including how many such contractors had assurances sought about them and how many did not provide adequate assurance. The total number of off-payroll engagements across departments and their total value is outside the remit of the off-payroll review, and it not held by HM Treasury.

A failure to provide assurance does not conclusively denote anything about the tax arrangements of the individuals concerned. For example, in some of the 504 instances the engagements came to a natural conclusion before assurance was received. Nevertheless, referrals to HMRC for further investigation occurred in all relevant cases across government. HMRC will investigate rule bending and breaking, including fraud investigation by both specialist civil and criminal teams where appropriate. HMRC are unable to provide details of individual cases due to taxpayer confidentiality so it is not possible to calculate the amount of tax recovered as a result of the referrals.

The review found that not all relevant contracts contained the clause required to allow departments to seek assurance. However, assurance was requested and received from the majority of contractors regardless. As I set out in my Statement of 14 November 2016, I expect departments to have these clauses in place and departments can expect to be fined if breaches of this nature are found in the next review. The table below details contracts that, as part of this review, cannot be confirmed as containing the required clause: