Blog

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many accountancy (a) practitioners and (b) firms are supervised by (i) HM Revenue and Customs and (ii) each of the other accountancy bodies; and how many such practitioners and firms have been (A) investigated for suspected money laundering and (B) struck off as a result of such investigations.

Mr David Gauke

There are 15 supervisors of the accountancy service provider (ASP) sector in the United Kingdom, including HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

13,131 ASPs are registered with HMRC for anti-money laundering supervision. The professional accountancy bodies listed in Schedule 3 to the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 between them supervise 32,069 firms and individuals. Whilst the statistics vary between bodies as to the number of individuals supervised compared to firms, 18,872 of the 32,069 have been identified as individuals.

HMRC does not record statistics for its investigations in a way that enables figures relating to ASPs to be separately identified. HMRC does not hold data about practitioners and firms investigated or struck off by other supervisory bodies.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what powers the police have to obtain information on the beneficial ownership of companies when considering whether to impose restraint orders or confiscation orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Mr John Hayes

As part of a criminal investigation, police can also conduct a parallel confiscation investigation using the powers in the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The purpose of a confiscation investigation is to obtain a confiscation order following the offender’s conviction. As part of that process, and in order to preserve assets for confiscation, a restraint order can be obtained at any point during the criminal investigation or proceeding to effectively freeze those assets. The powers provided by Part 8 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 for a confiscation investigation are a production order, a search and seizure warrant, a disclosure order, a customer information order and an account monitoring order. A disclosure order effectively empowers an investigator to demand information and evidence, including by way of an interview. A customer information order requires any financial institution to provide information they possess on an individual or business including details of any customer due diligence information.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many staff of HM Revenue and Customs have had the power of arrest in each year since 2009-10.

Mr David Gauke

The number of HM Revenue & Customs officers with the power of arrest is constantly fluctuating and it is not possible to give figures for each year from 2009-10. The total number of officers recorded as having powers of arrest in April 2016 was 1449.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to his Department’s news story of 10 April 2016, UK launches cross-government taskforce on the Panama Papers, how many full-time equivalent staff from each agency have been allocated to that taskforce; and whether any staff in that taskforce (a) have the power of arrest, (b) are authorised to access directly the contents of Suspicious Activity Reports, (c) are able to request data on companies incorporated in foreign countries and (d) have powers to fully investigate any allegations of (i) non-compliance with sanctions, (ii) money laundering and (iii) terrorist financing.

Mr David Gauke

There are upward of 100 people currently involved in the multi-agency Taskforce. The number of officers holding each different power is not recorded centrally. Each taskforce member agency has its own statutory powers, networks, functions and confidentiality restrictions. By drawing on these powers and networks, the taskforce will be more effective than any single agency acting independently.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with which countries the UK has negotiated agreements on the exchange of tax information which (a) are in compliance with the OECD’s standard for such agreements and (b) provide for the automatic exchange of tax information since the OECD’s standard was released in July 2014.

Mr David Gauke

The UK has exchange of tax information agreements with 142 different jurisdictions, through Double Taxation Agreements and Tax Information Exchange Agreements, and also as party to the OECD/Council of Europe Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (the ‘Multilateral Convention’).

A list of the international agreements the UK is party to can be found on Gov.uk under ‘Tax Treaties’, and details of which jurisdictions have entered the Multilateral Convention into force alongside the UK can be found on the OECD website.

Of the 142 international tax agreements the UK is party to, only the following 12 do not meet the international standard for exchange of information on request:

1. Egypt

2. Fiji

3. Gambia

4. Israel

5. Jamaica

6. Kenya

7. Namibia

8. Oman

9. Papua new Guinea

10. Sri Lanka

11. Swaziland

12. Zimbabwe

    That international standard does not apply to automatic exchange. The standard for automatic exchange the question refers to (as published by the OECD in July 2014) is the Common Reporting Standard, the globally acceptable standard on automatic exchange of information with respect of financial accounts information.

    The means of ensuring this standard was through a common Competent Authority Agreement, which supplements the international tax agreement allowing for exchange of tax information, rather than being an international tax agreement itself. There is no standard for automatic exchange in international tax agreements; just whether the agreement allows for it or not.

    It is the UK policy to interpret international tax agreements to allow automatic exchange even where not expressly stated, with the exception of cases where the exchange of information provision clearly uses restrictive wording that would preclude such an exchange.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to paragraphs H.2 to H.6 of HM Revenue and Customs document, Measuring tax gaps 2015 edition: methodological annex, published in October 2015, what the initial estimate was of the value of large business tax under consideration (a) in total and (b) for each tax to which large businesses are subject in each year since 2009-10; how many times those estimates were revised (i) up and (ii) down in each such year and for each such tax; and what the total revised value of large business tax under consideration was after HM Revenue and Custom’s negotiations with those businesses.

Greg Hands

Tax under consideration is HM Revenue and Customs’ (HMRC) estimate of the maximum potential additional tax liability in each case, before they have carried out a full investigation of the specific facts or analysis of relevant law. It is not actual tax either owed or unpaid; it is a tool to guide HMRC enquiries to focus on the most significant risks that exist at any particular time with the largest businesses. In many cases, when HMRC have looked at the full facts it becomes clear that there is some lesser additional liability or even no additional liability at all. Tax under consideration is a snapshot of work in progress and will naturally vary from time to time as outstanding issues are settled and new risks are identified. Tax under consideration covers all taxes, including Corporation Tax, VAT, PAYE and National lnsurance contributions. As it is an internal estimate used within HMRC, it is not subject to challenge by large businesses.

Until 31 March 2014, HMRC’s Large Business Service dealt with the tax affairs of around 800 of the largest businesses in the UK. From 1 April 2014 HMRC’s Large Business directorate deals with the tax affairs of around 2,000 large businesses.

Snapshots of tax under consideration in each year were:

HMRC’s Large Business directorate (largest 2,000 businesses):

31 March 2015 – £19 billion

HMRC’s Large Business Service (largest 800 businesses):

31 March 2014 – £15.7 billion

31 July 2013 – £18.8 billion

31 July 2012 – £21.3 billion

31 March 2011 – £25.5 billion

31 March 2010 – £33.4 billion

The estimate of total tax under consideration shown in Measuring Tax Gaps Table 7.1, page 62, differs from the figures above for two reasons:

• it shows tax under consideration for the individual financial years relating to liability

• it includes corporation tax only.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, which competent authorities in the UK will be able to access data on the beneficial ownership of companies incorporated in (a) other EU countries and (b) British Overseas Territories.

Harriett Baldwin

All UK competent authorities can request company beneficial ownership information from foreign jurisdictions through Mutual Legal Assistance and other information sharing arrangements such as the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units. Furthermore, more than 30 countries have now joined the initiative to automatically share beneficial ownership information among participants (the statement can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/520459/statement_on_the_initiative_for_exchange_of_beneficial_ownership_information.pdf). The Prime Minister also recently announced that UK law enforcement and tax agencies will have full access to information on the beneficial ownership of companies incorporated in all UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies (except Guernsey).

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-04.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, which developing countries will be able to access data on the beneficial ownership of companies incorporated in (a) other EU countries and (b) British Overseas Territories.

Mr David Gauke

Countries can request company beneficial ownership information from foreign jurisdictions through Mutual Legal Assistance and other information sharing arrangements such as the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units. Furthermore, more than 30 countries have now joined the initiative to automatically share beneficial ownership information among participants. The statement setting out which countries have so far joined the initiative can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/520459/statement_on_the_initiative_for_exchange_of_beneficial_ownership_information.pdf.