Editorial

'Pots' and 'Kettles'

In my editorial last week, I commented that HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) seems determined to adopt a 'policing' role in respect of tax agents, based on their further consultation document 'Working with Tax Agents: The Next Stage'. This week, I received a press release from HMRC, pointing out that there is one month left to comment on the proposals, as the consultation period closes on 3 March.

HMRC's Permanent Secretary for Tax, Dave Hartnett, states in the press release that the proposed powers in HMRC's favour "...are carefully focused on the small minority of agents whose approach to their work brings the profession as a whole into disrepute." He adds: "If taxpayers are to get the service they deserve we have to work with tax agents in an open and positive atmosphere." Space does not allow me to explain in full why I oppose HMRC's proposals. Nevertheless, I would be interested to know:    

1) Where is HMRC's evidence of this disreputable behaviour among tax agents? I am on a Technical Committee of the Chartered Institute of Taxation. When the Committee asks HMRC to consider proposals from time to time, the Committee is invariably asked to provide evidence of the necessity for those proposals, and/or to provide 'real life' examples to illustrate our point. To date, I have seen no such evidence or examples from HMRC to support the necessity of their proposals regarding tax agents.

2) If it is only a 'small minority of agents', why are such wide ranging powers needed? Why not simply target the cuplrits using HMRC's not inconsiderable array of existing powers?

It is a bit rich in my view to talk about "standards of service", at a time when HMRC have issued numerous incorrect tax codes to taxpayers (see statement on the HMRC website). HMRC comments in the consultation document: "However, HMRC has a statutory duty to protect the Exchequer. The need to improve its own performance does not weaken the need for HMRC to have appropriate powers to address cases where the actions of individual tax agents result in a loss of tax." To counter such a dismissive comment, perhaps the professional bodies should start a consultation on ways in which HMRC could improve its own standards of service?

As mentioned, the consultation ends on 3 March, so there is still time to add your voice to this important matter. I would urge you to do so.

Best wishes,

Mark McLaughlin

Managing Editor