1-20 of 62 results for subject:Taxation
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.282 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.018 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Taxation
- We searched for
- subject_t:Taxation OR subject_t:Levies OR subject_ses:93208
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
More
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, if she will provide details of conditions attached to awards, including a) commitments regarding UK headquarters and office presence, b) commitments regarding UK-based hiring and job creation, c) commitments regarding UK tax residency and tax payments, d) commitments regarding...
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, if she will provide details of conditions attached to awards, including a) commitments regarding UK headquarters and office presence, b) commitments regarding UK-based hiring and job creation, c) commitments regarding UK tax residency and tax payments, d) commitments regarding...
Sovereign AI is designed to help the most promising UK AI companies start, scale and remain anchored in the UK. Before any equity investment is made, the Fund assesses a company’s current and future UK nexus, including domicile, headquarters and key executives, technical staff and R&D activity, and expected UK procurement, infrastructure and ecosystem contribution.
Equity investments are made as a minority co-investor, often in competitive rounds. Attaching anchoring conditions such as those mentioned would put Sovereign AI investments at a significant competitive disadvantage and weaken the Fund's ability to achieve its overall objective.
For non-equity support, UK anchoring is reflected in published eligibility and assessment criteria, including UK registration and requirements to demonstrate substantive R&D in the UK where applicable.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Autumn Budget 2025, what comparative analysis she has undertaken on the impact of the uptake of EVs of the introduction of pay-per-mile schemes in other jurisdictions including Iceland and New Zealand.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Autumn Budget 2025, what comparative analysis she has undertaken on the impact of the uptake of EVs of the introduction of pay-per-mile schemes in other jurisdictions including Iceland and New Zealand.
As announced at Budget 2025, the Government is introducing Electric Vehicle Excise Duty (eVED) from April 2028, a new mileage charge for electric and plug-in hybrid cars, recognising that electric vehicles (EVs) contribute to congestion and wear and tear on the roads but pay no equivalent to fuel duty.
The Government considered the wider EV take-up landscape from examples in other countries. The impact of the introduction of similar taxes in other countries is not directly comparable, as in most international examples, the announcement coincided with the reduction or removal of government support for consumers to buy EVs. In contrast, the UK government has taken action to ensure that driving an electric vehicle is an attractive choice for consumers, and rather than reducing up-front incentives for EVs, 80% of eVED revenue from the first three years is being reinvested to extend support for EVs and the auto manufacturing industry.
In addition, the eVED rate for electric cars (3 pence per mile) will be set at half the fuel duty rate paid by the average petrol/diesel car driver, which is substantially lower than the rates set for schemes in New Zealand and Iceland (equivalent of more than 5 pence per mile).
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has had discussions with the Minister for Women and Equalities on the potential impact on women of the increase in the angel investor annual income threshold to £170,000.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has had discussions with the Minister for Women and Equalities on the potential impact on women of the increase in the angel investor annual income threshold to £170,000.
The Chancellor announced at Budget that the Government will legislate to reinstate the previous eligibility criteria to qualify as a high net worth or sophisticated investor. The relevant legislation was laid in Parliament on 6 March, and is set to come into force on 27 March.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what consideration he gave to the potential impact on equalities of increasing to £170,000 the annual income threshold for eligibility for the high net worth individual exemption in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2023; and...
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what consideration he gave to the potential impact on equalities of increasing to £170,000 the annual income threshold for eligibility for the high net worth individual exemption in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2023; and...
The changes to the financial promotion exemptions that came into force on 31 January 2024 were subject to a public consultation which closed in March 2022.
However, the Government recognises the concerns that have been raised recently about these changes. I met recently with the angel investing sector and listened carefully to the representations made, and the Government is working closely with the sector to address the concerns raised.
In line with the practice of successive administrations, details of internal discussions are not usually disclosed.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what recent discussions he has had with relevant stakeholders on the potential equalities impact of the Growth Plan 2022 on (a) women, (b) Black, Asian and minority ethnic people, (c) disabled people and (d) LGBT+ people.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what recent discussions he has had with relevant stakeholders on the potential equalities impact of the Growth Plan 2022 on (a) women, (b) Black, Asian and minority ethnic people, (c) disabled people and (d) LGBT+ people.
In developing the proposals outlined at the recent fiscal event, the Treasury followed rigorous processes to ensure compliance with legal requirements under the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) in the Equality Act 2010 to carefully consider the impact of its decisions on those sharing protected characteristics. This is in line with both our legal obligations under the Act and with our strong commitment to promoting fairness.
In practice, it is disappointing that it did not include that analysis and the Minister does not appear aware of the impact of her Government’s
policies on women. I can enlighten her: put together, the 2021 autumn Budget and the 2022 spring statement take £28 billion from the pockets of women over the next six years. That is £1,000 for every woman in the country. So why is her Government still refusing to impose a windfall tax to reduce bills for everyone and provide up to £600 for the households who need it, many of them run by women?
In practice, it is disappointing that it did not include that analysis and the Minister does not appear aware of the impact of her Government’s
policies on women. I can enlighten her: put together, the 2021 autumn Budget and the 2022 spring statement take £28 billion from the pockets of women over the next six years. That is £1,000 for every woman in the country. So why is her Government still refusing to impose a windfall tax to reduce bills for everyone and provide up to £600 for the households who need it, many of them run by women?
I simply do not recognise the figures that the hon. Lady is putting forward; it is not right to say that we are taking money out of the pockets of women. We have put forward a spring statement and a financial package that is looking after the interests of everyone in this country, because we look after people irrespective of their sex, gender, race; we look at people based on socioeconomic characteristics in particular and those who are most vulnerable or disadvantaged.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many (a) individuals and (b) organisations made representations to his Department on the change to the Statutory Residence Test announced on 9 April 2020.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many (a) individuals and (b) organisations made representations to his Department on the change to the Statutory Residence Test announced on 9 April 2020.
At the start of the pandemic, HMT and HMRC received a large number of requests for easements, all of which were considered, resulting in more than 80 COVID-19 related easements and exemptions being introduced to support businesses and individuals since March 2020, with many of these still in place.
The Government took a principled approach to changing the rules for the Statutory Residence Test so that any individual within certain critical sectors working on COVID-19 related activity would have benefited from the exemption.
For further details, please see the statement published by the Prime Minister’s office on 23 April:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/information-relating-to-the-ventilator-challenge-and-the-statutory-residence-test
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether his Department has made an estimate of the number of people who have been affected by the change to the Statutory Residence Test announced on the 9 April 2020 in the (a) 2019-20 and (b) 2020-21 financial years.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether his Department has made an estimate of the number of people who have been affected by the change to the Statutory Residence Test announced on the 9 April 2020 in the (a) 2019-20 and (b) 2020-21 financial years.
COVID-19 measures and guidance related to the Statutory Residence Test (SRT) have been estimated to have a negligible cost to the exchequer. This is because they will in most cases preserve what an individual's tax residence determination would be in the absence of COVID-19.
The number of individuals affected by the change is expected to be small.
Further information is available in the corresponding Tax Information and Impact Note on GOV.UK:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether his Department has made an assessment of the effect on revenue to the Exchequer of the change to the Statutory Residence Test announced on 9 April 2020 in the (a) 2019-20 and (b) 2020-21 financial years.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether his Department has made an assessment of the effect on revenue to the Exchequer of the change to the Statutory Residence Test announced on 9 April 2020 in the (a) 2019-20 and (b) 2020-21 financial years.
COVID-19 measures and guidance related to the Statutory Residence Test (SRT) have been estimated to have a negligible cost to the exchequer. This is because they will in most cases preserve what an individual's tax residence determination would be in the absence of COVID-19.
The number of individuals affected by the change is expected to be small.
Further information is available in the corresponding Tax Information and Impact Note on GOV.UK:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will publish the communication between (a) himself and his Department, (b) the Prime Minister and (c) the Prime Minister’s Office on the changes to the Statutory Residence Test announced on 9 April 2020.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will publish the communication between (a) himself and his Department, (b) the Prime Minister and (c) the Prime Minister’s Office on the changes to the Statutory Residence Test announced on 9 April 2020.
At the start of the pandemic, HMT and HMRC received a large number of requests for easements, all of which were considered, resulting in more than 80 COVID-19 related easements and exemptions being introduced to support businesses and individuals since March 2020, with many of these still in place.
The Government took a principled approach to changing the rules for the Statutory Residence Test so that any individual within certain critical sectors working on COVID-19 related activity would have benefited from the exemption.
For further details, please see the statement published by the Prime Minister’s office on 23 April:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/information-relating-to-the-ventilator-challenge-and-the-statutory-residence-test
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect on UK tax revenues of the changes proposed in the OECD's Two-pillar approach to address the tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect on UK tax revenues of the changes proposed in the OECD's Two-pillar approach to address the tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy.
Securing a global solution to the tax challenges posed by digitalisation remains a priority for the Government.
The Government continues to play an active role in shaping the proposals under consideration within the OECD, with a view to delivering an enduring multilateral solution that works in the UK’s long-term fiscal and economic interests.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many times HMRC has been required to refund tax paid by former employees as a function of termination payments as a result of an incorrect decision in relation to injury to feelings being classified as connected to the termination in each of...
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many times HMRC has been required to refund tax paid by former employees as a function of termination payments as a result of an incorrect decision in relation to injury to feelings being classified as connected to the termination in each of...
Payments made to an individual as compensation for injury to feelings can be paid tax free where they are not connected with the termination of an employment. HM Revenue and Customs have recently updated guidance that sets out the circumstances in which compensation payments are, or are not, connected with the termination of an employment.
The information requested is not available as HMRC do not hold data relating to tax refunds for incorrect decisions regarding payments made for injury to feelings connected to the termination of employment.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Answer of 7 October 2019 to Question 293714, whether he makes an equality impact assessment on people that HMRC contacts in for tax compliance checks.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Answer of 7 October 2019 to Question 293714, whether he makes an equality impact assessment on people that HMRC contacts in for tax compliance checks.
HMRC consider the equality impacts of all their policies, including compliance policies, before they are introduced, and these assessments are published within Tax Impact Information Notes on GOV.UK. HMRC are committed to treating all their customers fairly and to providing tailored support and reasonable adjustments to all customers who need extra help to manage their tax and benefit affairs. They offer support to all customers undergoing compliance checks according to their needs.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to section 15 of and schedule 3 to the Finance (No.3) Act 2018, what estimate he has made of the annual cost to the public purse of the exemption from tax on offshore receipts in respect of intangible property.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to section 15 of and schedule 3 to the Finance (No.3) Act 2018, what estimate he has made of the annual cost to the public purse of the exemption from tax on offshore receipts in respect of intangible property.
The taxation of offshore receipts in respect of intangible property was a new measure enacted in Section 15 of and Schedule 3 to the Finance Act 2019. The measure applies a direct UK Income tax charge to amounts received in a low tax jurisdiction in respect of intangible property, to the extent that those amounts are referable to the sale of goods or services in the UK. It is forecast to raise over £1.1 billion over five years, as follows:
Exchequer impact (£m)
2018 to 2019 | 2019 to 2020 | 2020 to 2021 | 2021 to 2022 | 2022 to 2023 | 2023 to 2024 |
0 | 0 | +475 | +275 | +220 | +165 |
The measure, as enacted, includes three exemptions: a de minimis of £10m of UK sales, an exemption for business undertaken in the territory of residence, and an exemption where tax is being charged at 50% or more of the UK tax. These exemptions aim to target the legislation at multinational groups which generate significant income from intangible property through UK sales and which have made arrangements such that the income is received in offshore jurisdictions where it is taxed at no or low effective rates. The yield forecast for the measure was based on the rules as defined in the legislation.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many and what proportion of taxpayers were in each tax bracket who were contacted by HMRC in respect of tax compliance checks.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many and what proportion of taxpayers were in each tax bracket who were contacted by HMRC in respect of tax compliance checks.
The information requested is not available.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many and what proportion of UK companies are not required by HMRC to submit tax returns.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many and what proportion of UK companies are not required by HMRC to submit tax returns.
All companies are initially required to submit tax returns except for those declared exempt or dormant. In the most recent accounting period (June 2019), 715,360 (16%) of UK companies were not required by HMRC to submit a tax return.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 5 July 2019 to Question 270381 on Share Fishermen: Taxation, what the timeframe is for HMRC to confirm the new scheme.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 5 July 2019 to Question 270381 on Share Fishermen: Taxation, what the timeframe is for HMRC to confirm the new scheme.
HMRC plan to write to all share fishermen as soon as possible, advising them that the share fishermen scheme will stop after the July Self Assessment (SA) period. The letter will refer share fishermen to the SA guidance, which includes guidance on setting up a Budget Payment Plan should they wish to take advantage of that.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether people participating in the Share Fisherman Scheme will be able to continue to participate in the scheme for the length of their working lives.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether people participating in the Share Fisherman Scheme will be able to continue to participate in the scheme for the length of their working lives.
The current voluntary payment scheme for share fishermen was introduced to help customers with an uncertain earning pattern to save towards their income tax liability, which is accounted for and paid via the annual self-assessment (SA) process. The scheme is supported by Barclays, operating special bank accounts, from which HMRC can periodically withdraw funds.
These arrangements no longer meet banking regulations. There has also been very low take-up of the voluntary payment scheme, so HMRC are working with Barclays to review what services can be offered to share fishermen in future, taking into account developments in the income tax self-assessment process and wider tax administration as well as the payment options available to other taxpayers.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 29 April 2019 to Question 247155 and with reference to the UK's tax treaties with Uruguay, Sweden and Slovenia containing non-discrimination clauses, why those countries are not included in the Government's list of jurisdictions with which the UK...
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 29 April 2019 to Question 247155 and with reference to the UK's tax treaties with Uruguay, Sweden and Slovenia containing non-discrimination clauses, why those countries are not included in the Government's list of jurisdictions with which the UK...
Following a recent update to HMRC’s International Manual, which lists the countries with which the UK has a non-discrimination article, these three countries were inadvertently omitted. This was an oversight which has now been corrected. However, the treaties with Uruguay, Sweden and Slovenia have always been available on the gov.uk page that provides the full text of all of the UK’s treaties.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many tax treaties are currently being negotiated.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many tax treaties are currently being negotiated.
The UK is currently actively negotiating, or will begin the first round of negotiations this year, with 11 jurisdictions. There are a further 13 jurisdictions with which we have begun negotiations but where progress has stalled for a variety of reasons, for example changes of government in the other country. We also continue our work to update the UK’s treaty network to reflect the minimum standards from the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) initiative, which includes working with our treaty partners to introduce the Multilateral Instrument (MLI) to implement tax treaty related measures to prevent BEPS.