Proceeding contribution from Mark Hoban (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 13 May 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance Bill.
Finance Bill
In a way, that goes back to risk and materiality. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West said from a sedentary position, "The Bermudan subsidiary." That is not a reflection on the company for which the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Stewart Hosie) worked. It is interesting to ascertain what constitutes the gap that we are considering. Is it simply straightforward accounting for day-to-day transactions and the normal run of business, or are we looking at a layer of tax planning above day-to-day transactions? Are the Government targeting the latter? I am sure that any attached risks will emerge from HMRC's risk analysis procedures. I have spoken for longer than I intended. I thought that I would make a brief contribution to the debate, but hon. Members have made many useful comments about how the provision will work in practice. I end with a quote from the Institute of Chartered Accountants, which helps summarise the position. It says of clause 92:""This proposed new requirement appears to impose further onerous obligations whilst adding nothing new in terms of tax compliance. The proposed measure is disproportionate because it applies a potentially onerous personal liability on all the senior accounting officers ab initio. HMRC's risk analysis procedures should identify the small number of large companies that do not have adequate accounting systems to prepare a correct and complete return. Rather than introduce this measure, if HMRC is concerned about internal accounting systems it would make more sense to extend the existing declaration that is required on the corporation tax return."" That is a balanced criticism of the provision, which has been hastily introduced with inadequate consultation. There are many grey areas, yet companies will be required to comply with it from an accounting period that starts the day after the Bill receives Royal Assent, without sight of draft secondary legislation. In the interests of maintaining industry's confidence in HMRC and ensuring that HMRC knows what it is doing, the reason for doing it and what the costs and benefits are, we should delay implementation until the first anniversary of the Bill's passage.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 492 c873-4
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Accountability Audit Accountancy Companies Bingo Excise duties Exhaust emissions Large goods vehicles Fuels Gaming Double taxation Motor vehicles Oil Prices Taxation VAT Rural areas
- Legislation
- Finance Bill 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:34:51 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_557628
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_557628
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_557628