1-20 of 236 results for subject:Surcharges
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.237 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Surcharges
- We searched for
- subject_t:Surcharges OR subject_ses:93172
Type
House
Session
Month
Department
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many times the victims' surcharge has been (a) imposed, (b) collected, (c) cancelled and (d) outstanding for people receiving a (i) conditional discharge, (ii) fine, (iii) suspended sentence, (iv) community sentence and (v) custodial sentence in each financial year since 2010.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many times the victims' surcharge has been (a) imposed, (b) collected, (c) cancelled and (d) outstanding for people receiving a (i) conditional discharge, (ii) fine, (iii) suspended sentence, (iv) community sentence and (v) custodial sentence in each financial year since 2010.
The table below shows the value of victim surcharge orders imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding since April 2011.
Victim Surcharge | ||||||||
Victim surcharge imposed | Value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition | Value of victim surcharge cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Value of victim surcharge outsanding at end of year of imposition | Total value of victim surcharge collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge outstanding regardless of imposition date | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £501,887 | £473,116 | £7,219,000 | ||||
2011/12 | £12,199,956 | £6,810,532 | £645,381 | £4,744,043 | £10,281,567 | £1,355,514 | £1,163,017 | £10,121,000 |
2012/13 | £15,508,307 | £7,607,886 | £888,027 | £7,012,395 | £10,517,641 | £1,605,519 | £1,384,779 | £12,084,000 |
2013/14 | £33,726,535 | £15,343,460 | £2,265,389 | £16,117,686 | £19,548,368 | £2,395,662 | £2,937,982 | £21,110,000 |
2014/15 | £38,631,424 | £17,302,260 | £2,350,532 | £18,978,631 | £24,569,735 | £2,362,914 | £3,711,748 | £29,381,000 |
The HMCTS Trust Statement also provides financial information on fines, victim surcharge and other types of financial impositions ordered in the criminal courts for each financial year since 2010-11.
It is not possible to subdivide the value of victims’ surcharge imposed, collected and cancelled into the categories of adults, youths and organisations nor report on how many times the victims’ surcharge was imposed, collected and cancelled for various sentences; to do so would incur disproportionate cost.
Data notes:
1. The value of victim surcharge that was cancelled in the same year of imposition cannot be broken down into administrative and legal cancellations.
2. The ‘total value of victim surcharge collected in a year’ includes the ‘value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition.
3. The figures representing the total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled include the values of those victim surcharge impositions administratively cancelled in the same year of imposition. Impositions are only administratively cancelled in accordance with a strict criteria. Legal cancellations occur after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate.
4. The reporting functionality from which this data has been extracted has only been in existence since April 2011 and it is not possible to break the data for 2010 down in the same format.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value is of victims' surcharge (a) imposed, (b) collected, (c) cancelled and (d) outstanding in each financial year since 2010.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value is of victims' surcharge (a) imposed, (b) collected, (c) cancelled and (d) outstanding in each financial year since 2010.
The table below shows the value of victim surcharge orders imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding since April 2011.
Victim Surcharge | ||||||||
Victim surcharge imposed | Value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition | Value of victim surcharge cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Value of victim surcharge outsanding at end of year of imposition | Total value of victim surcharge collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge outstanding regardless of imposition date | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £501,887 | £473,116 | £7,219,000 | ||||
2011/12 | £12,199,956 | £6,810,532 | £645,381 | £4,744,043 | £10,281,567 | £1,355,514 | £1,163,017 | £10,121,000 |
2012/13 | £15,508,307 | £7,607,886 | £888,027 | £7,012,395 | £10,517,641 | £1,605,519 | £1,384,779 | £12,084,000 |
2013/14 | £33,726,535 | £15,343,460 | £2,265,389 | £16,117,686 | £19,548,368 | £2,395,662 | £2,937,982 | £21,110,000 |
2014/15 | £38,631,424 | £17,302,260 | £2,350,532 | £18,978,631 | £24,569,735 | £2,362,914 | £3,711,748 | £29,381,000 |
The HMCTS Trust Statement also provides financial information on fines, victim surcharge and other types of financial impositions ordered in the criminal courts for each financial year since 2010-11.
It is not possible to subdivide the value of victims’ surcharge imposed, collected and cancelled into the categories of adults, youths and organisations nor report on how many times the victims’ surcharge was imposed, collected and cancelled for various sentences; to do so would incur disproportionate cost.
Data notes:
1. The value of victim surcharge that was cancelled in the same year of imposition cannot be broken down into administrative and legal cancellations.
2. The ‘total value of victim surcharge collected in a year’ includes the ‘value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition.
3. The figures representing the total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled include the values of those victim surcharge impositions administratively cancelled in the same year of imposition. Impositions are only administratively cancelled in accordance with a strict criteria. Legal cancellations occur after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate.
4. The reporting functionality from which this data has been extracted has only been in existence since April 2011 and it is not possible to break the data for 2010 down in the same format.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value is of victims' surcharge (a) imposed, (b) collected, (c) cancelled and (d) outstanding for (i) adults, (ii) youths and (iii) organisations in each financial year since 2010.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the value is of victims' surcharge (a) imposed, (b) collected, (c) cancelled and (d) outstanding for (i) adults, (ii) youths and (iii) organisations in each financial year since 2010.
The table below shows the value of victim surcharge orders imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding since April 2011.
Victim Surcharge | ||||||||
Victim surcharge imposed | Value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition | Value of victim surcharge cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Value of victim surcharge outsanding at end of year of imposition | Total value of victim surcharge collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge outstanding regardless of imposition date | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £501,887 | £473,116 | £7,219,000 | ||||
2011/12 | £12,199,956 | £6,810,532 | £645,381 | £4,744,043 | £10,281,567 | £1,355,514 | £1,163,017 | £10,121,000 |
2012/13 | £15,508,307 | £7,607,886 | £888,027 | £7,012,395 | £10,517,641 | £1,605,519 | £1,384,779 | £12,084,000 |
2013/14 | £33,726,535 | £15,343,460 | £2,265,389 | £16,117,686 | £19,548,368 | £2,395,662 | £2,937,982 | £21,110,000 |
2014/15 | £38,631,424 | £17,302,260 | £2,350,532 | £18,978,631 | £24,569,735 | £2,362,914 | £3,711,748 | £29,381,000 |
The HMCTS Trust Statement also provides financial information on fines, victim surcharge and other types of financial impositions ordered in the criminal courts for each financial year since 2010-11.
It is not possible to subdivide the value of victims’ surcharge imposed, collected and cancelled into the categories of adults, youths and organisations nor report on how many times the victims’ surcharge was imposed, collected and cancelled for various sentences; to do so would incur disproportionate cost.
Data notes:
1. The value of victim surcharge that was cancelled in the same year of imposition cannot be broken down into administrative and legal cancellations.
2. The ‘total value of victim surcharge collected in a year’ includes the ‘value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition.
3. The figures representing the total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled include the values of those victim surcharge impositions administratively cancelled in the same year of imposition. Impositions are only administratively cancelled in accordance with a strict criteria. Legal cancellations occur after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate.
4. The reporting functionality from which this data has been extracted has only been in existence since April 2011 and it is not possible to break the data for 2010 down in the same format.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total is of (a) uncollected and (b) cancelled victims' surcharges.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total is of (a) uncollected and (b) cancelled victims' surcharges.
The table below shows the value of victim surcharge orders imposed, collected, cancelled and outstanding since April 2011.
Victim Surcharge | ||||||||
Victim surcharge imposed | Value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition | Value of victim surcharge cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Value of victim surcharge outsanding at end of year of imposition | Total value of victim surcharge collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge outstanding regardless of imposition date | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £501,887 | £473,116 | £7,219,000 | ||||
2011/12 | £12,199,956 | £6,810,532 | £645,381 | £4,744,043 | £10,281,567 | £1,355,514 | £1,163,017 | £10,121,000 |
2012/13 | £15,508,307 | £7,607,886 | £888,027 | £7,012,395 | £10,517,641 | £1,605,519 | £1,384,779 | £12,084,000 |
2013/14 | £33,726,535 | £15,343,460 | £2,265,389 | £16,117,686 | £19,548,368 | £2,395,662 | £2,937,982 | £21,110,000 |
2014/15 | £38,631,424 | £17,302,260 | £2,350,532 | £18,978,631 | £24,569,735 | £2,362,914 | £3,711,748 | £29,381,000 |
The HMCTS Trust Statement also provides financial information on fines, victim surcharge and other types of financial impositions ordered in the criminal courts for each financial year since 2010-11.
It is not possible to subdivide the value of victims’ surcharge imposed, collected and cancelled into the categories of adults, youths and organisations nor report on how many times the victims’ surcharge was imposed, collected and cancelled for various sentences; to do so would incur disproportionate cost.
Data notes:
1. The value of victim surcharge that was cancelled in the same year of imposition cannot be broken down into administrative and legal cancellations.
2. The ‘total value of victim surcharge collected in a year’ includes the ‘value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition.
3. The figures representing the total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled include the values of those victim surcharge impositions administratively cancelled in the same year of imposition. Impositions are only administratively cancelled in accordance with a strict criteria. Legal cancellations occur after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate.
4. The reporting functionality from which this data has been extracted has only been in existence since April 2011 and it is not possible to break the data for 2010 down in the same format.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many times the victims’ surcharge was (1) imposed, (2) collected, (3) cancelled, and (4) outstanding, for people receiving (a) a conditional discharge, (b) a fine, (c) a suspended sentence, (d) a community sentence, and (e) a custodial sentence, in each financial year since 2010.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many times the victims’ surcharge was (1) imposed, (2) collected, (3) cancelled, and (4) outstanding, for people receiving (a) a conditional discharge, (b) a fine, (c) a suspended sentence, (d) a community sentence, and (e) a custodial sentence, in each financial year since 2010.
The tables below, published in the HMCTS Trust Statement, show the value of fines and victim surcharge orders imposed, collected and cancelled since April 2011.
It is not possible to break the value of victims’ surcharge imposed, collected and cancelled down into the categories of adults, youths and organisations nor report on how many times the victims’ surcharge was imposed, collected and cancelled against various sentences; to do so would incur disproportionate costs as these figures can only be identified by carrying out a manual check of all live and closed financial imposition accounts.
Fines | ||||||
Fines Imposed | Value of fines collected in the same year of imposition | Value of fines cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Total value of fines collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of fines administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of fines legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £35,872,328 | £45,552,942 | |||
2011/12 | £227,342,345 | £79,148,756 | £21,301,334 | £155,795,149 | £44,738,459 | £45,772,502 |
2012/13 | £237,280,254 | £82,277,185 | £24,728,112 | £156,283,468 | £53,663,354 | £44,516,757 |
2013/14 | £233,012,097 | £79,524,734 | £25,864,207 | £156,063,245 | £68,213,510 | £44,781,612 |
2014/15 | £250,740,040 | £84,688,512 | £22,863,892 | £161,930,070 | £45,344,786 | £41,110,741 |
Victim Surcharge | ||||||
Victim surcharge imposed | Value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition | Value of victim surcharge cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Total value of victim surcharge collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £501,887 | £473,116 | |||
2011/12 | £12,199,956 | £6,810,532 | £645,381 | £10,281,567 | £1,355,514 | £1,163,017 |
2012/13 | £15,508,307 | £7,607,886 | £888,027 | £10,517,641 | £1,605,519 | £1,384,779 |
2013/14 | £33,726,535 | £15,343,460 | £2,265,389 | £19,548,368 | £2,395,662 | £2,937,982 |
2014/15 | £38,631,424 | £17,302,260 | £2,350,532 | £24,569,735 | £2,362,914 | £3,711,748 |
Data notes:
1. The values of fines and victim surcharge that were cancelled in the same year of Imposition cannot be broken down into administrative and legal cancellations.
2. The ‘total value of fines collected in a year’ includes the ‘value of fines collected in the same year of imposition’.
3. The figures representing the total value of fines and victim surcharge administratively cancelled both include the values of those impositions administratively cancelled in the same year of imposition. Impositions are only administratively cancelled in accordance with a strict criteria. Legal cancellations occur after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate.
4. The reporting functionality from which this data has been extracted has only been in existence since April 2011 and it is not possible to break the data for 2010 down in the same format.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the value of victims’ surcharges (1) imposed, (2) collected, (3) cancelled, and (4) outstanding, for (a) adults, (b) youths, and (c) organisations, in each financial year since 2010.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the value of victims’ surcharges (1) imposed, (2) collected, (3) cancelled, and (4) outstanding, for (a) adults, (b) youths, and (c) organisations, in each financial year since 2010.
The tables below, published in the HMCTS Trust Statement, show the value of fines and victim surcharge orders imposed, collected and cancelled since April 2011.
It is not possible to break the value of victims’ surcharge imposed, collected and cancelled down into the categories of adults, youths and organisations nor report on how many times the victims’ surcharge was imposed, collected and cancelled against various sentences; to do so would incur disproportionate costs as these figures can only be identified by carrying out a manual check of all live and closed financial imposition accounts.
Fines | ||||||
Fines Imposed | Value of fines collected in the same year of imposition | Value of fines cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Total value of fines collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of fines administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of fines legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £35,872,328 | £45,552,942 | |||
2011/12 | £227,342,345 | £79,148,756 | £21,301,334 | £155,795,149 | £44,738,459 | £45,772,502 |
2012/13 | £237,280,254 | £82,277,185 | £24,728,112 | £156,283,468 | £53,663,354 | £44,516,757 |
2013/14 | £233,012,097 | £79,524,734 | £25,864,207 | £156,063,245 | £68,213,510 | £44,781,612 |
2014/15 | £250,740,040 | £84,688,512 | £22,863,892 | £161,930,070 | £45,344,786 | £41,110,741 |
Victim Surcharge | ||||||
Victim surcharge imposed | Value of victim surcharge collected in the same year of imposition | Value of victim surcharge cancelled in the same year of imposition (administrative and legal cancellations) 1 | Total value of victim surcharge collected regardless of imposition date 2 | Total value of victim surcharge administratively cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | Total value of victim surcharge legally cancelled regardless of imposition date 3 | |
2010/11 | Data is only available in this format from April 2011 onwards 4 | £501,887 | £473,116 | |||
2011/12 | £12,199,956 | £6,810,532 | £645,381 | £10,281,567 | £1,355,514 | £1,163,017 |
2012/13 | £15,508,307 | £7,607,886 | £888,027 | £10,517,641 | £1,605,519 | £1,384,779 |
2013/14 | £33,726,535 | £15,343,460 | £2,265,389 | £19,548,368 | £2,395,662 | £2,937,982 |
2014/15 | £38,631,424 | £17,302,260 | £2,350,532 | £24,569,735 | £2,362,914 | £3,711,748 |
Data notes:
1. The values of fines and victim surcharge that were cancelled in the same year of Imposition cannot be broken down into administrative and legal cancellations.
2. The ‘total value of fines collected in a year’ includes the ‘value of fines collected in the same year of imposition’.
3. The figures representing the total value of fines and victim surcharge administratively cancelled both include the values of those impositions administratively cancelled in the same year of imposition. Impositions are only administratively cancelled in accordance with a strict criteria. Legal cancellations occur after the case has been reconsidered by a Judge or Magistrate.
4. The reporting functionality from which this data has been extracted has only been in existence since April 2011 and it is not possible to break the data for 2010 down in the same format.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many visa applicants in (a) Scotland, (b) Glasgow and (c) Glasgow Central constituency have been liable for the Immigration Health Surcharge since that charge's introduction.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many visa applicants in (a) Scotland, (b) Glasgow and (c) Glasgow Central constituency have been liable for the Immigration Health Surcharge since that charge's introduction.
Since its introduction in April, the Immigration Health Surcharge has collected more than £100 million in income for the NHS. The Home Office does not hold the necessary management information to determine how many visa applicants have been liable to pay the Immigration Health Surcharge by geographical location in the UK.
House of Commons briefing paper on recent policy changes that may affect migrant workers in the NHS.
House of Commons briefing paper on recent policy changes that may affect migrant workers in the NHS.
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
If we are to continue building an immigration system that is fair to British citizens and people who come here legitimately to play by the rules and contribute to our society, we must ensure that it is balanced...
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
If we are to continue building an immigration system that is fair to British citizens and people who come here legitimately to play by the rules and contribute to our society, we must ensure that it is balanced...
It will not have escaped the House’s attention that the Home Secretary has struck a markedly different tone in her opening remarks this afternoon from the one she struck at her party conference in Manchester last week. The change in tone is very welcome, but she said at her conference,...
It will not have escaped the House’s attention that the Home Secretary has struck a markedly different tone in her opening remarks this afternoon from the one she struck at her party conference in Manchester last week. The change in tone is very welcome, but she said at her conference,...
Nice try, but perhaps the right hon. Gentleman should read the speech I gave last week, as he would see that I am saying exactly what I said then. In that speech,
I also quoted the many reports, from the OECD and others such as the Migration Advisory Committee, that...
Nice try, but perhaps the right hon. Gentleman should read the speech I gave last week, as he would see that I am saying exactly what I said then. In that speech,
I also quoted the many reports, from the OECD and others such as the Migration Advisory Committee, that...
How can the Home Secretary describe those things as achievements when she has so lamentably failed to keep the promise that she made at the election before last, which was to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands? The figure has in fact gone up to more than 330,000.
How can the Home Secretary describe those things as achievements when she has so lamentably failed to keep the promise that she made at the election before last, which was to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands? The figure has in fact gone up to more than 330,000.
I can easily describe those things as achievements. They are achievements that the Labour Government, which ended in 2010, signally failed to secure. That Government did nothing, for example, about people coming to use the health service and then failing to contribute to it. We have changed the rules and...
I can easily describe those things as achievements. They are achievements that the Labour Government, which ended in 2010, signally failed to secure. That Government did nothing, for example, about people coming to use the health service and then failing to contribute to it. We have changed the rules and...
Does the Home Secretary not recognise that this is a nasty, punitive Bill that will inevitably risk yet more racism and discrimination and undermine the social cohesion that she says she cares about? At the very least, will she guarantee full financial compensation to anyone whose livelihood is undermined by...
Does the Home Secretary not recognise that this is a nasty, punitive Bill that will inevitably risk yet more racism and discrimination and undermine the social cohesion that she says she cares about? At the very least, will she guarantee full financial compensation to anyone whose livelihood is undermined by...
I will tell the hon. Lady what impacts on social cohesion. It is when our constituents see people here in this country illegally and able to continue to be in this country illegally. It is fair that we deal with those who abuse our system and who do the wrong...
I will tell the hon. Lady what impacts on social cohesion. It is when our constituents see people here in this country illegally and able to continue to be in this country illegally. It is fair that we deal with those who abuse our system and who do the wrong...
On my right hon. Friend’s particular answer to that question, the problem is that it is very difficult for someone to see that a person is an illegal immigrant. What they see is someone who is different. Does she not accept that, within this law, there is the potential for...
On my right hon. Friend’s particular answer to that question, the problem is that it is very difficult for someone to see that a person is an illegal immigrant. What they see is someone who is different. Does she not accept that, within this law, there is the potential for...
I recognise the concern that my hon. Friend shows in relation to these issues. He has taken a particular interest in matters relating to immigration, but I will repeat what I have just said to the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas): it is only fair to people who...
I recognise the concern that my hon. Friend shows in relation to these issues. He has taken a particular interest in matters relating to immigration, but I will repeat what I have just said to the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas): it is only fair to people who...
rose—
rose—
I will give way to the hon. Gentleman, but then I must make some progress.
I will give way to the hon. Gentleman, but then I must make some progress.
The Home Secretary says that this Bill is the answer, but only 12 months ago we had another Immigration Act that was the answer. How many more Immigration Acts will we have from this Government in the next five years?
The Home Secretary says that this Bill is the answer, but only 12 months ago we had another Immigration Act that was the answer. How many more Immigration Acts will we have from this Government in the next five years?