The above consultation closes on 12 April 2013.

“This is a consultation document seeking views on the structure and powers for Revenue Scotland, ensuring tax compliance, tackling tax avoidance, resolving tax disputes, treatment of taxpayer information and accelerated tax changes.

The Scottish Government has indicated that it intends to use the new competence of the Scottish Parliament to introduce taxes to replace the UK Stamp Duty Land Tax and Landfill Tax from 1 April 2015. This consultation complements the separate consultations on the Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (concluded August 2012; draft Bill introduced to the Scottish Parliament on 29 November) and a Scottish Landfill Tax (consultation closes 15 January 2013).

Let’s start with the independence debate.  Michael Moore has confirmed that the UK Government will not be bringing forward a proposal for further devolution.  I wonder if that will change if the opinion polls change.  This at least gives us a clear choice.  The choice being between “Calman minus” combined with the extremely unlikely scenario of Westminster devolving serious tax and fiscal powers after a ‘NO’ vote, and control over all tax and fiscal powers by 2016.

I think the ‘NO’ campaign has made a mistake here.  How those whose preferred choice is ‘devo plus’ or ‘devo max’ vote holds the key to which side wins in 2014.  Are they more likely to vote ‘NO’ as a result of Michael Moore’s statement?  The ‘NO’ campaign has not had a good start to the year.  The independence will cost £1 gaffe, support for the Scottish Government’s timetable for the transition to independence, the ridiculing of the claim that Scotland would need to ratify 8,500 treaties and then there was the loss of the UKs ‘AAA’ rating.  A serious proposal for further tax and fiscal powers would at least been a positive move by the ‘NO’ campaign and a change from the continuing negativity.

Now to a man who it seems can do anything.  Olympics gold medals, not a problem.  Forcing the HM Treasury into a u-turn, not a problem.  The UK Government has after all decided to grant a tax amnesty to non-resident athletes attending the London Grand Prix event this July. Olympic champion sprinter Usain Bolt announced that he would not attend unless his global earnings from sponsorship and endorsements were exempted, but until now HM Treasury had resisted the demand.  More on this from the STEP Journal can be found here.

A report by the House of Commons’ influential Public Accounts Committee says that promoters of so-called boutique tax avoidance schemes are “running rings around HMRC in a game of cat and mouse that HMRC is losing”.  It suggests that HMRC should publicly name those who sell ‘abusive’ schemes to as many clients as possible before HMRC shuts the scheme down.  This is estimated to cost the HM Treasury £5bn a year.  The Committee claimed that HMRC only knows about 46% of tax avoidance schemes, and that promoters who run the schemes find it unacceptably easy to put forward a “reasonable excuse” for not disclosing the scheme in order to escape a fine.  More on this from Accountancy Age can be found here and the Guardian here.

The UK government is to disqualify companies and individuals from bidding for public contracts if they have taken part in failed tax avoidance schemes.  This applies from 1 April 2013. Bidders will have to notify procurement departments if any tax return in the past 10 years has been found incorrect as a result of an HMRC challenge, or has contravened the Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Scheme rules.  More on this from HM Treasury can be found here.

A mansion tax is back in the news.  Although as it is a local taxation proposal it is not just a matter for the UK Parliament.  Local taxation is controlled by the Scottish Parliament.  A point missed by most reports.  The Liberal Democrats proposal would see either a 1% levy on homes worth over £2m or the introduction of new council tax bands for expensive homes.  More on the Liberal Democrat proposal from the Guardian can be found here.  The Labour Party has also announced plans to introduce a mansion tax on all homes worth more than £2m in order to fund the reintroduction of the 10p tax rate abolished in 2007.  More on the Labour proposal from the BBC News website can be found here.

An ongoing programme of jobs cuts helped play a major part in HMRC exceeding their cost-savings target for 2011/12, according to a report by the National Audit Office.  The report can be found here.  The figures give an indication of the scale of the cuts suffered by HMRC.  Spending slashed by £269m over the 12 months to 31 March 2012.  This was 19% more than the anticipated £249m.  A reduction of £140m was made by axing 2,400 full-time equivalent members of staff. The department plans to have lowered its running costs by £950m between the UK Government’s 2010 sending review and the end of the 2014/15 tax year.  It expects to see the loss of 10,000 full-time equivalent employees and 300,000 square metres of estate.

Press reports indicate that the inheritance tax nil rate band is to be frozen for several more years beyond the already announced date of April 2015, as part of the UK Government’s plans for funding elderly care in England.  More on this from the Herald can be found here and the BBC news website here.  Another example of the problem that can arise under devolution when the tax power remains at Westminster, inheritance tax, and control over an associated area such as social care is devolved.

Now to the least surprising story of the month.  The Confederation of British Industry has warned that the new Financial Transaction Tax announced by the European Commission may have a detrimental effect on UK jobs and growth.  Matthew Fell, the CBI Director for Competitive Markets, said: “it is particularly worrying that the increased scope of the tax will now cover businesses’ risk management activities, as well as hitting financial services in non-participating member states, like the UK, because of extra-territoriality”.  More on this story from the Telegraph can be found here.

Now to Europe and how the EU is demanding action against tax-planning.  The European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs has published a report proposing that member states revoke the banking licences of financial institutions that help their customers evade taxes.  More on this can be found here.

The heavy tax increases imposed by the Greek Government last year have actually caused a sharp fall in tax receipts. January’s tax revenues in Greece fell to €4.05bn, 16% down on the January 2012 figures, due to a collapse in consumption and a corresponding decrease in indirect tax payments.  More on this can be found here.

An interesting opinion piece can be found in the New York Times challenging the ‘Myth of the Rich Who Flee From Taxes’.  It was prompted by US Masters golf champion Phil Mickelson’s recent threat to decamp from California because the state’s top rate of income tax is increasing from 10.3 to 13.3%.  I agree with the conclusion reached.  It really is a myth although it does not stop those arguing against serious tax and fiscal powers for the Scottish Parliament from using it. The piece from the New York Times can be found here.

And lastly, well done to the Scottish teams who beat Ireland at the weekend.

The latest addition to our website is our “Know How” page.

This page not only includes our popular “Property and Conveyancing Casebook” but a “Training and Practice Notes” section.

This includes VAT and inheritance tax slides with notes.  These are aimed at a LLB or Diploma in Legal Practice class.  The format and content can though be easily altered to suit a different audience.

There are also Practice Notes on landfill tax and aggregates levy.  These Practice Notes provide a comprehensive introduction to these taxes.

If you would to know more about these materials please feel to contact us.  See the “Who we are” section of our website.

Pawson deceased v HMRC 2012 UKFTT 51 (TC)

The executors of the late Nicolette Pawson are launching a fighting fund to take their case to the England and Wales Court of Appeal, following their defeat by HMRC at the Upper tax Tribunal last month.

The case turns on whether furnished holiday lets are eligible for business property relief from inheritance tax.

“Mr Justice Henderson decided that the services provided ‘were all of a relatively standard nature [with] nothing to distinguish it from any other actively managed furnished letting business of a holiday property’.”

The Upper tax Tribunal decision can be found here, my earlier blog on this can be found here and an excellent piece from the STEP journal on this can be found here.

Where to start.  So much has already happened in 2013.

Let’s start with the independence debate.  I had finally finished my chapter on “the battle for a Scottish tax system” and then another devolution proposal appears and Ruth Davidson almost says something of interest on the tax and fiscal powers debate.

The latest devolution paper is called “devo more” and it is from The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR).  I know it is difficult to keep up.  Again it starts from the premise of what is best for the UK not necessarily Scotland.  Personal income tax, partial control of VAT, excise duties on alcohol and tobacco and air passenger duty would be devolved.  Alan Trench, of the University of Edinburgh, who wrote the report, said it was “clear devolution must go further to meet popular demand and his plan minimises the adverse effects on other parts of the United Kingdom.”  The IPPR report can be found here.

It is a pity that there was not more interest shown in putting together a serious proposal for tax and fiscal powers for the Scottish Parliament during Calman.  Let’s not forgot that none of the “NO” parties  has come close to arguing for the powers recommended for devolving in “devo plus”, let alone “devo max”, to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament.  The Liberal Democrats have even gone backwards form what they proposed under the Steel Commission.  See my earlier blog on this which can be found here.

Then we had Ruth Davidson’s speech which promised a lot and delivered almost nothing.  Davidson promised no new tax or fiscal powers, no timetable for even considering the issue and no confirmation that she has moved on from saying that corporation tax and welfare powers should not be devolved.  What did she say, or rather what did she hint at:  “Sources close to Davidson confirmed that she will consider setting up a new commission to examine the devolution of more powers to the Scottish Parliament.”  For more on Davidson’s speech see Alan Cochrane’s report in the Telegraph which can be found here.

The stance of the “NO” parties is a continuation of what I call the “Calman doctrine”.  Do nothing unless under pressure, then if under pressure make a huge fuss about having someone look at the issue, take your time, offer as little as possible, exaggerate any problems, minimise or ignore any advantages and ensure HMRC and HM Treasury remain in control.

Time, and credibility, is fast running out for the “NO” campaign parties if they are to come up with a serious tax and fiscal proposal.  The most recent “Scottish Social Attitudes Survey” was clear.  Independence had 35% support and “devo max” 32%.  That is a clear majority for almost all powers, including tax and welfare powers, to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament.

Now to the UK tax system.  It seems that no-one is happy.

Two recent stories show why a Scottish tax system is needed.   The first one relates to carbon capture.  The article on this from the Herald can be found here.   The second relates to air passenger duty.  The article on this from the Scotsman can be found here.

Then there is the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee.  It has called for the re-establishment of a single annual UK Budget, saying that the UK’s Autumn Statement has increasingly taken on the character of a second Budget resulting in uncertainty and costs for business and the economy.  A report published by the Committee says:  “The primacy of the Budget as the main focus of fiscal and economic policy making should be re-established”.  More on this from the BBC news website can be found here.

The impressive chair of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, Margaret Hodge, has claimed that new tax laws are excessively influenced by major corporations and accountancy firms.  Hodge has argued that working groups set up by the UK Government to discuss tax reforms were overly dominated by those with vested interests in reducing their tax contributions.  More on this from the BBC news website can be found here.

Even business leaders are seemingly unhappy.  The UK Government’s plans to reform tax laws forcing large companies to be more transparent regarding their tax affairs have been criticised by business leaders.  The fear is that such laws would stifle the UK’s economic recovery as businesses would be reluctant to locate in the UK.  More on this from the Guardian can be found here.

HMRC offers poor value for money, according to a report by the National Audit Office.  The report claims that more than 20 million phone calls went unanswered last year, whilst callers who did get through were made to wait on average 282 seconds, up from 107 seconds last year, costing the public £33 million on call charges.  More on this can be found here.

It has been claimed that the UK Government will have raised taxes 300 times and ordered 120 tax cuts by the end of their proposed term of government.  More on this claim from the Telegraph can be found here.  One of the more controversial UK tax proposals is termed a “bedroom tax”.  More on this can be found here.

David Cameron has told the World Economic Forum conference in Davos that he will use the UK’s G8 presidency to launch a campaign against ‘unethical’ tax avoidance by multinational companies using ‘an army of clever accountants’.  The accountancy profession whilst I am sure not unhappy at being termed clever, took umbrage with what Cameron said.  More on this from the STEP journal can be found here.  Interestingly Cameron again brings ethics into the tax debate.  That said, does he intend to include the Crown Dependencies and the British overseas Territories in this campaign?  If not, this is nothing but a press release.

Members of France’s socialist cabinet have denounced the famous actor Gerard Depardieu, who has shifted his residence just over the Belgian border in order to escape the Hollande government’s tax rises.  Depardieu has retorted with an open letter to the newspapers, accusing the French Government of punishing success and talent, and offering to give up his passport.  More on this can be found here.

Let’s end with some news on a Financial Transaction Tax.  Eleven EU member states are to introduce a tax on financial transactions expected to generate £35bn in annual revenues.   As a tax avoidance measure, the European Commission has amended the relevant directive to catch any transaction where either of the parties is domiciled in the tax area, or is trading on behalf of a client in the tax area.  That will mean that this will also apply to some UK transactions.  The European Commission is now expected to present proposals on the detail of this new taxation scheme which will need to be accepted by unanimous agreement of the participating states.  More on this can be found here.   Whether to introduce a Financial Transaction Tax is just one of the many tax decisions Scotland will be able to decide for itself if it decides to vote “YES” in 2014.

Have a great weekend and in particular to all those representing Scotland this weekend.

Estate of A R Ellis deceased v HMRC, [2013] UKFTT 775 TC02426

The First-tier tax tribunal has confirmed that a taxpayer’s election as to his main residence is conclusive as long that the property in question was in fact one of his residence.

The Tribunal decision can be found here.

On 27 November the Scottish Government announced it is postponing the next revaluation of non-domestic rates until 2017.  In addition it has announced a comprehensive review of the non-domestic rates system.

The Scottish Government consultation, “Supporting Business – Promoting Growth” can be found here.  The consultation ends 22 February 2013.

My final “tax land” of 2012 as I have a looming chapter deadline on the subject of a Scottish tax system.

Where to start?  Let’s start with the UK Chancellor’s “Autumn” statement.

George Osborne admitted that the UK had missed its debt reduction targets putting the UK’s AAA credit rating under threat.  Osborne also announced that the planned rise on fuel duty is to be axed and the personal allowance of income tax payers is to be boosted.  Benefits are to be limited to a 1% rise a year for the next 3 years and economic growth will be lower than predicted until at least 2018.

In response the Institute of Fiscal Studies warned that one million people will find themselves joining the higher 40p income tax rate by 2015.  Far higher than the 400,000 figure quoted by Osborne.  The IFS also said further austerity measures to increase taxes and cut benefits were unavoidable to fix a £27bn black-hole in the UK economy before the next UK General Election.

Figures also showed that poorest 30% of households will suffer the most under the changes announced.  More on this from the Scotsman can be found here.

The AAA rating is of course an issue in the independence referendum.  One of the arguments made by those arguing NO is that an independent Scotland, notwithstanding its oil reserves, would lose its AAA credit rating.  This issue is now a problem for the NO campaign as the UK, in the event of a YES vote, would presumably be desperate to retain Scotland in a monetary union to protect its credit rating.

The YES campaign also received a further boost when it was confirmed that nearly 17 billion barrels of oil are to be recovered from the North Sea over the next 30 years following a £134bn investment by oil and gas companies.  The majority of the new developments will be in Scottish waters while production from gas fields in the southern North Sea begins a dramatic decline. More on this from the Scotsman can be found here.

Now to the tax avoidance debate.

The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has warned officials from HMRC that firms that devise complicated tax regimes are “running rings” around them. The Committee Chair, Margaret Hodge MP, said that the public would consider such schemes “completely and utterly immoral”. More on this from the Guardian can be found here.  My recent blog on this and the lack of political will to reform the UK’s tax system can be found here.

Meanwhile the Chief Secretary to the UK Treasury, Danny Alexander, has warned against naming and shaming large firms who do not pay the correct amount of tax, insisting that he is obliged to defend firms’ “taxpayer confidentiality”. More on this from the Mirror can be found here.  This adds to the growing evidence that the UK Government is at best being half-hearted in its attempts to tackle this issue.

Further evidence for this claim can be found when you consider that only 5% of the UK Government’s announced investment into HMRC will be aimed at tackling tax avoidance.  The context to this is of course the large budget reduction and cut in staff numbers already made to HMRC.  More on this from the Times can be found here.

According to an investigation by the Times, offshore companies are exploiting a tax loophole which allows them to buy up some of the UK’s most expensive homes and avoid paying property stamp duty, inheritance tax and capital gains tax.  More on this from the Times can be found here.  The Times has done some excellent work on this issue over the last few months.

Figures from HMRC show that the number of people declaring an annual income of more than £1m fell from 16,000 to 6,000 after the previous 50p top rate was brought in.  More on this from the Telegraph can be found here.  What this statistic purports to show is though open to debate.

Final point on the tax avoidance and tax evasion debate.  The claim that I have made on many occasions that tax for some, namely large companies and the wealthy, is becoming a matter of negotiation – almost voluntary in nature – seems now to be generally accepted.  That is clearly what Starbucks think.

The Scottish Government has unveiled plans to reform stamp duty land tax in Scotland.  The importance of this should not be underestimated.  The Scottish Government must show that it has the competence to deal with tax matters.  The signs so far are positive.  More on this can be found here.

Now to matters slight further afield.

France’s Senate has rejected the Government’s 2013 Budget, which among other measures raised the marginal tax rate on annual income of over €150,000 to 45%, imposed a 75% “solidarity contribution” on income over €1m, and raised capital gains tax rates to match income tax rates.  The Budget will though almost certainly be forced through by the National Assembly.  More on this from Tax-news can be found here.

The Republic of Ireland Government has revealed its 2013 Budget.  It introduces a new annual property tax of 0.18% on properties valued below €1m, payable by owners.  More expensive properties will be taxed at €1,800 plus 0.25% of their value over €1m.  Initially, and until 2016, owners’ valuations will be accepted.  More on this from the Irish Times can be found here.

Finally to the USA.  The US Internal Revenue Service has published guidance on calculating the new 3.8% tax on investment income, imposed to pay for President Obama’s universal health insurance plan.  More on this from the Journal of Accountancy can be found here.

This has been a very interesting year for all those interested in tax and the wider Scottish tax and fiscal powers debate. I suspect that is not going to change in 2013.  Best wishes to you and yours for 2013.

A lot has been written in the past dew weeks about the attitude of a number of international companies to paying UK corporation tax.  This issue is though only one of a number of matters that needs to be addressed.

Is there the political will to reform the UK’s tax system?  I would argue no.  What evidence do I have for this?

1. The reluctance of the UK Government to address the paying of corporation tax by large international companies.

2. There is a lot of talk of tax simplification but the reality is very different.  The new reduced rate of inheritance tax is but one example.

3. If the UK Government was serious about reforming the tax system we would be at least be debating publishing summaries of business tax returns and other ideas to increase transparency.

4. The introduction of morality into this debate does not help matters.  A robust tax system should not need to rely on what is and what is not “moral”.

5.  Fairness is though crucial.  The perception is growing that tax for certain sections of our society is optional.  This needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.   The fact that it is increasingly difficult to tell what is “tax avoidance” and what is “tax evasion” does not help matters.

6.  The fact that the UK Government has allowed so many public sector people to be employed through service companies is nothing short of disgraceful.   This added to the perception of a lack of fairness.

7. The UK Government seemed to immediately say it would not introduce a Financial Transaction Tax because it was a European proposal.  The lack of a proper debate again added to the perception of a lack of fairness.

8. If the UK Government did care about the quality of UK’s tax system why have they made such deep cuts to HMRC’s budget and staff numbers.

This though is not just a UK Government matter.

It was reported a couple of months ago that a number of so-called celebrities were involved in schemes, perfectly legal, to reduce the amount of tax they paid.   The furore, if that is what it was, did not last long.  If the public do not seem to care too much about this issue then the UK Government might conclude it is not that important.

These issues apply just as much to the Scottish Government as further tax and fiscal powers reside in Edinburgh.

The Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (Scotland) Bill was introduced to the Scottish Parliament on 29 November. Some points of note:

• the Bill is expected to come into effect  on 1 April 2015;
• the Bill is the first of three-  a Landfill Tax Bill and Tax Management Bill will follow;
• the Scottish Ministers are the tax authority (s52) but the authority can be changed by order (a new body, Revenue Scotland has been established for that purpose);
• the tax authority can delegate administration and collection of the tax to Registers of Scotland (s53) (an idea first suggested by my colleague James Aitken);
• the tax will be progressive, i.e. tax is charged on the proportion  of the price exceeding the threshold rather than charging the higher rate of tax on the whole price (per SDLT)(ss24-26)
• like SDLT, LBTT will be charged on VAT (para 2, Schedule 2)
• the Bill contains a number of targeted anti-avoidance rules applying to specific exemptions and reliefs. The Scottish Government also intends to introduce a general anti-avoidance rule following a consultation on tax management;
• commercial leases are to be dealt with by subordinate legislation (s55) following consideration of the options (one of which is making tax payable annually on actual rent paid);
• residential leases are exempt (para 3, Schedule 1);
• licences to occupy are not exempt (ss14-16); and
• the Bill replicates existing SDLT provisions on partnerships & trusts. However, the Scottish Government intends to carry out further work on the provisions during the Bill’s Parliamentary passage to produce clearer legislation (to be brought forward at Stage 2).

The Bill is available here.
The Explanatory Notes are available here.
The Policy Memorandum can be found here.