1-20 of 2,504 results for subject:Taxation
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.373 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.014 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Taxation
- We searched for
- subject_t:Taxation OR subject_t:Levies OR subject_ses:93208
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress has been made in developing the IT system to support the delivery of the Digital Apprenticeship Voucher, and what plans they have for testing and piloting that scheme.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress has been made in developing the IT system to support the delivery of the Digital Apprenticeship Voucher, and what plans they have for testing and piloting that scheme.
The digital apprenticeship service is being built by the Skills Funding Agency in accordance with Cabinet Office best practice.
To ensure that the service is focused on employer and training provider needs we are performing extensive user research. The service will build on insights gathered from over 2000 employers and around 400 training providers. To make sure that the service is ready for the levy in April 2017, we plan to launch a substantial pilot with employers and providers later this year.
Further details on the apprenticeship levy and the digital apprenticeship service are available in the guide for employers which was published in April: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apprenticeship-levy-how-it-will-work
I talk to Treasury Ministers on a continuing basis and in my ministerial role I am more than happy to take up the cause of small businesses. I met representatives of the Federation of Small Businesses only last week and they reiterated their concerns about the proposals, but of course this is not a mandatory filing every quarter; it is effectively good bookkeeping. They raised their concerns and I am more than happy to listen to them and, most importantly, to represent them to the Treasury. Also, a consultation is taking place, so there is always room to make sure that we continue to do the right thing.
I talk to Treasury Ministers on a continuing basis and in my ministerial role I am more than happy to take up the cause of small businesses. I met representatives of the Federation of Small Businesses only last week and they reiterated their concerns about the proposals, but of course this is not a mandatory filing every quarter; it is effectively good bookkeeping. They raised their concerns and I am more than happy to listen to them and, most importantly, to represent them to the Treasury. Also, a consultation is taking place, so there is always room to make sure that we continue to do the right thing.
What discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the potential effect on small and medium-sized enterprises of proposed changes to filing of tax returns.
I am glad that the Minister is listening. My constituent, Sheila Knight, is the director of a small local business and she is very concerned about the proposal to make businesses submit data quarterly to HMRC. She says:
“It will cause a huge amount of extra work, expense and worry for absolutely no benefit. Like most small businesses, I collate my accounts information once a year and give it to my accountant. Having to do this four times a year will be a huge imposition and my accountant’s fees will be pro rata more expensive.”
Does the Minister not agree that what small businesses need is strategic support from the Government, not more bureaucracy and unnecessary cost?
I am glad that the Minister is listening. My constituent, Sheila Knight, is the director of a small local business and she is very concerned about the proposal to make businesses submit data quarterly to HMRC. She says:
“It will cause a huge amount of extra work, expense and worry for absolutely no benefit. Like most small businesses, I collate my accounts information once a year and give it to my accountant. Having to do this four times a year will be a huge imposition and my accountant’s fees will be pro rata more expensive.”
Does the Minister not agree that what small businesses need is strategic support from the Government, not more bureaucracy and unnecessary cost?
It is about reducing bureaucracy and cutting costs for small businesses. It is not a quarterly tax return; it is good, sensible bookkeeping, which good businesses do anyway. Keeping the books in good condition every quarter will help small businesses when they come to submit their annual returns. I am more than happy to meet the hon. Lady’s constituent and explain things to her, because there is a lot of misinformation.
It is about reducing bureaucracy and cutting costs for small businesses. It is not a quarterly tax return; it is good, sensible bookkeeping, which good businesses do anyway. Keeping the books in good condition every quarter will help small businesses when they come to submit their annual returns. I am more than happy to meet the hon. Lady’s constituent and explain things to her, because there is a lot of misinformation.
It is about reducing bureaucracy and cutting costs for small businesses. It is not a quarterly tax return; it is good, sensible bookkeeping, which good businesses do anyway. Keeping the books in good condition every quarter will help small businesses when they come to submit their annual returns. I am more than happy to meet the hon. Lady’s constituent and explain things to her, because there is a lot of misinformation.
I am glad that the Minister is listening. My constituent, Sheila Knight, is the director of a small local business and she is very concerned about the proposal to make businesses submit data quarterly to HMRC. She says:
“It will cause a huge amount of extra work, expense and worry for absolutely no benefit. Like most small businesses, I collate my accounts information once a year and give it to my accountant. Having to do this four times a year will be a huge imposition and my accountant’s fees will be pro rata more expensive.”
Does the Minister not agree that what small businesses need is strategic support from the Government, not more bureaucracy and unnecessary cost?
I am pleased to hear that the Minister has met the Federation of Small Businesses, of which I am a proud member. From that meeting, she will know that 60% of small businesses do not currently operate digital accounting systems. Does the Minister understand the rising level of anxiety in that part of the business community? Does she agree that it might be sensible for the Treasury to consider introducing the system on a voluntary basis, which made self-assessment such a success when it was introduced all those years ago?
I am pleased to hear that the Minister has met the Federation of Small Businesses, of which I am a proud member. From that meeting, she will know that 60% of small businesses do not currently operate digital accounting systems. Does the Minister understand the rising level of anxiety in that part of the business community? Does she agree that it might be sensible for the Treasury to consider introducing the system on a voluntary basis, which made self-assessment such a success when it was introduced all those years ago?
My hon. Friend makes a good point. There will always be good, full support for this digital movement. The other thing that is of concern to some small businesses is access to superfast broadband, because there is no point in doing this unless a business has it. Many small businesses are reticent to get up to speed—if I can put it that way—but I am confident that, with the excellent work of my hon. Friend the Minister for Culture and the Digital Economy, we are making huge progress and ensuring that all businesses have access to superfast broadband.
My hon. Friend makes a good point. There will always be good, full support for this digital movement. The other thing that is of concern to some small businesses is access to superfast broadband, because there is no point in doing this unless a business has it. Many small businesses are reticent to get up to speed—if I can put it that way—but I am confident that, with the excellent work of my hon. Friend the Minister for Culture and the Digital Economy, we are making huge progress and ensuring that all businesses have access to superfast broadband.
My hon. Friend makes a good point. There will always be good, full support for this digital movement. The other thing that is of concern to some small businesses is access to superfast broadband, because there is no point in doing this unless a business has it. Many small businesses are reticent to get up to speed—if I can put it that way—but I am confident that, with the excellent work of my hon. Friend the Minister for Culture and the Digital Economy, we are making huge progress and ensuring that all businesses have access to superfast broadband.
I am pleased to hear that the Minister has met the Federation of Small Businesses, of which I am a proud member. From that meeting, she will know that 60% of small businesses do not currently operate digital accounting systems. Does the Minister understand the rising level of anxiety in that part of the business community? Does she agree that it might be sensible for the Treasury to consider introducing the system on a voluntary basis, which made self-assessment such a success when it was introduced all those years ago?
The Minister has singularly failed to explain how the change will help businesses. I do not know whether she has ever produced a set of business accounts, but the Financial Secretary to the Treasury told MPs in a Westminster Hall debate in January that it would require a
“a summary of income and expenses.”—[Official Report, 25 January 2016; Vol. 605, c. 36WH.]
As every businessperson knows, that can be done only by putting together the full detail each quarter. Whether the Minister calls it reporting, filing or updating, her claim that the change represents a reduction in red tape is laughable. It is a major increase in bureaucracy, administration and costs, especially for those businesses without digital access. The Government should go away and think again.
The Minister has singularly failed to explain how the change will help businesses. I do not know whether she has ever produced a set of business accounts, but the Financial Secretary to the Treasury told MPs in a Westminster Hall debate in January that it would require a
“a summary of income and expenses.”—[Official Report, 25 January 2016; Vol. 605, c. 36WH.]
As every businessperson knows, that can be done only by putting together the full detail each quarter. Whether the Minister calls it reporting, filing or updating, her claim that the change represents a reduction in red tape is laughable. It is a major increase in bureaucracy, administration and costs, especially for those businesses without digital access. The Government should go away and think again.
I am one of those who actually had a real job or two before coming to this place. I can therefore assure the hon. Gentleman that, as a self-employed barrister, I absolutely did have to provide accounts each week, but I do not claim to have run a business of more than just myself and maybe one other. The most important thing is that these are not quarterly returns. The hon. Gentleman really should understand what is proposed. It is actually a good way of ensuring that small businesses always keep up to date with how their business is going. The change will enable businesses to do their annual returns considerably better.
I am one of those who actually had a real job or two before coming to this place. I can therefore assure the hon. Gentleman that, as a self-employed barrister, I absolutely did have to provide accounts each week, but I do not claim to have run a business of more than just myself and maybe one other. The most important thing is that these are not quarterly returns. The hon. Gentleman really should understand what is proposed. It is actually a good way of ensuring that small businesses always keep up to date with how their business is going. The change will enable businesses to do their annual returns considerably better.
I am one of those who actually had a real job or two before coming to this place. I can therefore assure the hon. Gentleman that, as a self-employed barrister, I absolutely did have to provide accounts each week, but I do not claim to have run a business of more than just myself and maybe one other. The most important thing is that these are not quarterly returns. The hon. Gentleman really should understand what is proposed. It is actually a good way of ensuring that small businesses always keep up to date with how their business is going. The change will enable businesses to do their annual returns considerably better.
The Minister has singularly failed to explain how the change will help businesses. I do not know whether she has ever produced a set of business accounts, but the Financial Secretary to the Treasury told MPs in a Westminster Hall debate in January that it would require a
“a summary of income and expenses.”—[Official Report, 25 January 2016; Vol. 605, c. 36WH.]
As every businessperson knows, that can be done only by putting together the full detail each quarter. Whether the Minister calls it reporting, filing or updating, her claim that the change represents a reduction in red tape is laughable. It is a major increase in bureaucracy, administration and costs, especially for those businesses without digital access. The Government should go away and think again.
What discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the potential effect on small and medium-sized enterprises of proposed changes to filing of tax returns.
What discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the potential effect on small and medium-sized enterprises of proposed changes to filing of tax returns.
I talk to Treasury Ministers on a continuing basis and in my ministerial role I am more than happy to take up the cause of small businesses. I met representatives of the Federation of Small Businesses only last week and they reiterated their concerns about the proposals, but of course this is not a mandatory filing every quarter; it is effectively good bookkeeping. They raised their concerns and I am more than happy to listen to them and, most importantly, to represent them to the Treasury. Also, a consultation is taking place, so there is always room to make sure that we continue to do the right thing.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if the Government will continue to pay for training to enable apprentices to achieve Level 2 or GCSEs in English and mathematics, as required, once the Apprenticeship Levy has been introduced.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if the Government will continue to pay for training to enable apprentices to achieve Level 2 or GCSEs in English and mathematics, as required, once the Apprenticeship Levy has been introduced.
Apprentices have to meet a minimum standard in both English and maths up to Level 2. There are specific qualifications they must achieve. If an apprentice does not already have these, they may need to do an English or maths course. We will pay providers directly, for the Level 1 and 2 English and maths training they provide to apprentices.
Further information on the amount that will be paid for English and maths training for apprentices who require it, will be published provisionally in June 2016 and confirmed in October 2016.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether apprenticeship levy funds will be usable to pay for qualifications embedded within apprenticeship standards.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether apprenticeship levy funds will be usable to pay for qualifications embedded within apprenticeship standards.
Employers will be able to use their levy funding (up to a maximum which will depend upon the standard or framework that is being trained against) to cover the costs of an apprentice’s training, assessment and certification. Apprenticeship training can either be on an apprenticeship standard, or on an apprenticeship framework.
Where a qualification is a requirement for achieving the standard or framework employers will be able to use levy funds to pay for the qualification. Levy funding cannot be used to fund other qualifications.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment he has made of the implications for UK universities of the proposal for a £1,000 a year levy on all businesses employing skilled non-EU staff.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment he has made of the implications for UK universities of the proposal for a £1,000 a year levy on all businesses employing skilled non-EU staff.
The Government is considering carefully the Migration Advisory Committee’s recommendations on the rate and scope of the Immigration Skills Charge. In advance of finalising the regulations that will introduce the charge from April 2017, we will take account of evidence about the likely impact on different types of organisation, including universities.
I welcome National Apprenticeship Week, which gives us a great opportunity to praise all apprentices, and to promote apprenticeships as a means of securing training skills and jobs for the future.
In a statement on apprentices last Thursday, the Minister of State said:
“We do not expect all companies that pay the levy to use up all the money in their digital accounts”.—[Official Report, 10 March 2016; Vol. 607, c. 454.]
What does that mean in practice? Can large and small companies take up any unspent levy? What estimate have the Government made of the number of companies involved, and of the proportion and value of the levy that will not be used by larger firms?
I welcome National Apprenticeship Week, which gives us a great opportunity to praise all apprentices, and to promote apprenticeships as a means of securing training skills and jobs for the future.
In a statement on apprentices last Thursday, the Minister of State said:
“We do not expect all companies that pay the levy to use up all the money in their digital accounts”.—[Official Report, 10 March 2016; Vol. 607, c. 454.]
What does that mean in practice? Can large and small companies take up any unspent levy? What estimate have the Government made of the number of companies involved, and of the proportion and value of the levy that will not be used by larger firms?
As ever, the Chair of the Select Committee has asked some penetratingly good questions, but I fear that I must ask him to wait until tomorrow, when he will hear more, as he will during the next few weeks.
As ever, the Chair of the Select Committee has asked some penetratingly good questions, but I fear that I must ask him to wait until tomorrow, when he will hear more, as he will during the next few weeks.
As ever, the Chair of the Select Committee has asked some penetratingly good questions, but I fear that I must ask him to wait until tomorrow, when he will hear more, as he will during the next few weeks.
I welcome National Apprenticeship Week, which gives us a great opportunity to praise all apprentices, and to promote apprenticeships as a means of securing training skills and jobs for the future.
In a statement on apprentices last Thursday, the Minister of State said:
“We do not expect all companies that pay the levy to use up all the money in their digital accounts”.—[Official Report, 10 March 2016; Vol. 607, c. 454.]
What does that mean in practice? Can large and small companies take up any unspent levy? What estimate have the Government made of the number of companies involved, and of the proportion and value of the levy that will not be used by larger firms?
Amendments to clause 35 negatived on division (7 votes to 10). Clause 35, discussed with new schedule 3 (Bodies excluded from the restrictions on public sector exit payments) agreed to. Schedule 4 agreed to. New Clause 1 (Power of Welsh Ministers to apply regulators' principles and code of practice) agreed to. New Clause 2 (Devolved Welsh matters) agreed to. New Clause 3 (Apprenticeships: information sharing) discussed with Government new clause 4 (Apprenticeship funding) agreed to. New Clause 5 (Market rent only option: rent assessment etc) agreed to. New Clause 6 (Reports on avoidance) agreed to. New Clause 22 (The Institute for Apprenticeships) discussed with Government new clause 23 (The Institute for Apprenticeships: transitional provision) and Government new schedule 2 (The Institute for Apprenticeships) agreed to. New Clause 23 (The Institute for Apprenticeships: transitional provision) agreed to. New Clause 21 (Extended Sunday opening hours and Sunday working), discussed with Government new schedule 1 (Sunday opening hours: rights of shop workers) under consideration when Committee adjourned.
Amendments to clause 35 negatived on division (7 votes to 10). Clause 35, discussed with new schedule 3 (Bodies excluded from the restrictions on public sector exit payments) agreed to. Schedule 4 agreed to. New Clause 1 (Power of Welsh Ministers to apply regulators' principles and code of practice) agreed...
Clause 1 discussed with new clause 12 (Payment practices: protection of retention monies in the construction industry) and new clause 16 (Information on the Enterprise Investment Scheme and Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme) agreed to. Schedule 1 agreed to. Clause 2 agreed to. Clause 3, discussed with new clause 14 (Guidance for local authorities) agreed to. Clause 4, discussed with new clause 7 (Companies: payment terms with suppliers) agreed to. Clause 5 agreed to. Written evidence reported to the House.
Clause 1 discussed with new clause 12 (Payment practices: protection of retention monies in the construction industry) and new clause 16 (Information on the Enterprise Investment Scheme and Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme) agreed to. Schedule 1 agreed to. Clause 2 agreed to. Clause 3, discussed with new clause 14 (Guidance...
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, with reference to the letter from Lord Livingston of Parkhead to the Chairman of the European Scrutiny Committee of 3 July 2014, Deposited Paper DEP2015-0877, what progress HM Revenue and Customs has made establishing a cross departmental working group...
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, with reference to the letter from Lord Livingston of Parkhead to the Chairman of the European Scrutiny Committee of 3 July 2014, Deposited Paper DEP2015-0877, what progress HM Revenue and Customs has made establishing a cross departmental working group...
HM Revenue and Customs has been in discussion with HM Treasury and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills to determine the parameters, principles and feasibility of a tax model. HMRC has also consulted with international organisations to consider best practice in this area. Further meetings are planned following the next round of negotiations when we expect some of the parameters for the model will become clearer.
Does the Business Secretary believe that the Google tax deal reached by his right hon. Friend the Chancellor is fair and proportionate?
Does the Business Secretary believe that the Google tax deal reached by his right hon. Friend the Chancellor is fair and proportionate?
I think it was a very important deal, not least because it leads to a change in behaviour. It sends out a message that if you do not pay your taxes properly and according to the rules, action will be taken.