UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-02-09.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what his policy is on the proposal from the European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee for a mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) in the EU, in order to have one set of rules for calculating the taxable profits of companies operating in more than one member state; and if he will press for the introduction of such a CCCTB with other EU member states in the Council.

    Mr David Gauke

    The European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee (ECON) has a keen interest in tax, and hence put forward certain proposals. However, the Commission has the sole power of initiative in relation to legislative measures. Tax files are to be agreed by unanimity at the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN). The European Parliament’s role in this process in not formal, and purely consultative.

    The term tax haven is often used as shorthand for low or zero tax jurisdictions. However, low tax rates are not by themselves harmful and the UK supports fair tax competition. The UK is working with other Member States in the EU Code of Conduct Group to identify harmful tax regimes and will continue to take strong action against aggressive avoidance and evasion.

    The UK and other Member States have not yet seen any proposals from the European Commission or the European Parliament on public country-by-country reporting (CbCR). The Commission is due to publish an Impact Assessment on public CbCR shortly, and we are interested in the results of their analysis. The UK will carefully consider any proposals put forward by the Commission.

    The UK played a leading role in encouraging other countries and jurisdictions to sign up to international tax transparency agreements during its G8 presidency in 2013. Thanks in large part to the UK’s continuing leadership on this agenda, over 90 countries have now committed to exchange information on offshore accounts, beginning in 2017 or 2018. The UK also initiated the international work on CbCR and was the first country to formally commit to implementing the OECD model for CbCR, with legislation in the Finance Act 2015. We support the proposal to amend the Directive on Administrative Co-operation to require all EU Member States to adopt and exchange the OECD CbCR template.

    The European Commission intends to publish a revised proposal for a mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) later this year. The Government will wait to see the detail of the Commission’s proposal, including a robust impact assessment, before finalising its position. However, we have stated that the UK will not sign up to anything that undermines our tax sovereignty.

  • Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 7 March 2016 to Question 29272, how many of the 2635 EEA nationals upon whom administrative travel papers were served in 2014 have left the UK.

    James Brokenshire

    After an EEA national has been served with administrative removal papers, they have 30 days to leave the country. They do not have to inform us of their departure. This period is set out in the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.

    Following this 30-day period, if the EEA national has not voluntarily left the UK Immigration Enforcement officers can and do forcibly remove these individuals. Out of the 2,635 EEA nationals who were served administrative removal papers in 2014 1,019 were forcibly removed.

  • Geoffrey Cox – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Geoffrey Cox – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Geoffrey Cox on 2016-04-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, when it is planned Dartmoor Farmers who farm on common land will receive payments under the Basic Payment Scheme; and if she will make a statement.

    George Eustice

    For those Basic Payment Scheme claims with commons, the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) has faced a particularly difficult challenge as it is necessary to wait until all claimants for a common have had their commons rights validated before the area for each commoner can be established. RPA is working to make the payments for claimants who have not been paid as promptly as possible, including the Dartmoor farmers who farm on Common land.

  • Lord Mendelsohn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Mendelsohn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mendelsohn on 2016-05-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for prohibiting full transparency in transaction costs in fund management reporting.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    The Government is committed to the principle that people should have access to appropriate and accessible investment options and understand the charges that they face.

    The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is currently conducting a market study into asset management. We await the FCA’s assessment of disclosure of costs and fees in fund management reporting, where these issues fall under the scope of the market study. The FCA expect to publish an interim report in summer 2016 and a final report in early 2017.

    With respect to the disclosure requirements imposed on pension trustees, the Department for Work and Pensions and the FCA jointly undertook a Call for Evidence on disclosure of costs and charges in workplace pension schemes during 2015. We and the FCA are assessing the responses received and remain committed to making regulations and rules in this Parliament requiring publication of costs and charges, as per the legal duty in the Pensions Act 2014.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-07-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent discussions he has had with his European counterparts on the implications of the outcome of the EU referendum for existing bilateral defence agreements.

    Michael Fallon

    Immediately after the referendum I contacted a number of my European counterparts to reassure them that Britain remains committed to existing bilateral Defence agreements and to NATO. The then Prime Minister and I reiterated this at the NATO Warsaw Summit. We will continue to engage closely with our Allies and partners.

  • Catherine West – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Catherine West – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Catherine West on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether the one-year post-implementation review of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 has been completed; and if she will make the outcome of that review available to hon. Members.

    Sir Oliver Heald

    The Ministry of Justice is finalising the one year post implementation review of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 and a decision will be made about publication in due course.

    It is considering the further reviews.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-11-10.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, in cases where a person has registered a donation to a charity for gift aid but ended the year below the income threshold for income tax, whether it is the policy of HM Revenue and Customs to reclaim the gift aid from the (a) donor or (b) charity; and if he will make a statement.

    Damian Hinds

    Individual donors are responsible for ensuring that they have paid sufficient tax to cover any Gift Aid reclaimed on their donations.

    In practice, where HMRC identifies tax to cover issues as a result of its compliance activity with a charity, it may invite the charity to make good any shortfall on behalf of their donors. The charity is not legally obliged to repay any over-claimed Gift Aid and the responsibility always remains that of the donor.

    Details of how much Gift Aid is reclaimed separately from donors and charities is not available.

  • Margaret Ferrier – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Margaret Ferrier – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Ferrier on 2015-12-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the page on the National Crime Agency website entitled, Cyber crime: Preventing young people from getting involved, what discussions she has had with the Home Secretary on interest in coding and possession of independent learning material on computing being considered possible indicators of risk of involvement in cyber crime.

    Nick Gibb

    The Secretary of State holds discussions on a range of topics with Cabinet Ministers.

    The National Crime Agency (NCA) has recently published guidance on preventing young people from becoming involved in cyber-crime: www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/crime-threats/cyber-crime/cyber-crime-preventing-young-people-from-getting-involved

    “

  • Lord Morris of Aberavon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Morris of Aberavon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Morris of Aberavon on 2016-01-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Bates on 30 November 2015 (HL3712), whether, in the interests of transparency, they will arrange for police forces to collate and publicise the occasions on which persons arrested but not charged have had their names disclosed.

    Lord Bates

    The Home Office currently has no plans to arrange for police forces to collate and publish data in relation to the occasions on which persons arrested but not charged have had their names disclosed.

    Police are guided in making such decisions by the College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice (APP) Guidance on ‘Relationships with the media’.

    There are clearly great risks in naming suspects and the College of Policing guidance makes clear that decisions should only be made on a case-by-case basis, and that the police should not release the names of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime unless they have clearly identified circumstances to justify disclosure.

  • Jim McMahon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Jim McMahon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim McMahon on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which electoral wards in England have exceeded a one in 200 saturation level for asylum placements; and by what percentage each such ward has exceeded that level.

    James Brokenshire

    As part of the regional dispersal policy for asylum seekers established in 2000, the advisory cluster limit of 1 asylum seeker for every 200 of the settled population, applies to local authority area level only. Data on the numbers of asylum seekers in local authority areas is published and can be found at (Asylum Vol 4. Table 16q). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-july-to-september-2015/asylum.

    Data is not collated at ward or constituency level and to do so would incur disproportionate costs, it may also be precluded by the provisions of the Data Protection Act, given that individuals could reasonably be identified through the release of such data.