View more on these topics

Danby Bloch: Tax avoidance trends advisers need to know about

Danby Bloch white

The main professional accountancy and tax bodies have released a new policy document, Professional Conduct in Relation to Taxation, that will apply to their members from 1 March.

At the very least, advisers should understand the new rules of engagement accountants and other tax professionals are working with. Perhaps they should even consider adopting something similar.

The big changes relate to their approach to tax avoidance. It is all a long way removed from the famous old dictum of Lord Clyde: “No man in this country is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so as to arrange his legal relations to his business or to his property as to enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel into his stores.

“The Inland Revenue is not slow – and quite rightly – to take every advantage which is open to it under the taxing statutes for the purpose of depleting the taxpayer’s pocket. And the taxpayer is, in like manner, entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue.”

This statement, made in a 1929 tax case, was displayed in the offices of many an adviser back in the day. But a great deal has changed since then.

The rot, as some might see it, first set in during the 1970s, when one of those at the top of what was then called the Inland Revenue issued a warning to the tax scheming community. The message was that if taxpayers chose to play cat and mouse, it was not incumbent on the Revenue to play the part of the mouse.

And it was roughly around that time the tax authorities started to win a series of notable cases against some of the most egregious avoidance schemes. The hallmarks of these schemes were that documents and cash circulated round a series of parties, creating legal events that purportedly ended up with a tax loss for the client. In fact, the judges found the only material transaction would have been the passing of a substantial fee from the client to the tax schemers and other players in the charade.

Assertive approach 

Encouraged by these successes, the Revenue pursued further cases and took a more assertive approach to taxpayers. Successive governments introduced more and more anti-avoidance legislation, although much of it was reactive. Each year, the tax avoidance industry came up with new schemes and each year finance acts tried to outlaw them with targeted new measures.

Governments grew wise to this and, in line with international trends, introduced more general anti-avoidance laws. These included such measures as disclosure of tax avoidance schemes and the general anti-avoidance rule.

HM Revenue & Customs has grown a lot tougher in its fight against tax avoidance, while social and political attitudes have also become less forgiving. The financial crash and its aftermath seemed to be something of a turning point. Since then, a parade of celebrities and businesses have been exposed in the media for indulging in daring tax avoidance activities.

The professional accountancy and tax bodies have officially called time on avoidance, writing it into the code that sets out standards of behaviour in relation to tax. The following extracts from the new document give a flavour of the message:

“At all times members must act lawfully and with integrity and expect the same from their clients. Tax planning should be based on a realistic assessment of the facts and on a credible view of the law. Members should draw their clients’ attention to where the law is materially uncertain, for example, because HMRC is known to take a different view of the law. Members should consider taking further advice appropriate to the risks and circumstances of the particular case, for example where litigation is likely.”

While advisers know a lot about the importance of clients’ attitude to investment risk, tax advisers have been getting to grips with clients’ attitude to tax risk and the need to explain the possible downsides of entering into schemes.

The document also says: “Tax advice must not rely for its effectiveness on HMRC having less than the relevant facts. Any disclosure must fairly represent all relevant facts.”

Some schemes relied on not drawing the tax authorities’ attention to the various arrangements, with other more legalistic details acting as a second line of defence.

Finally: “Members must not create, encourage or promote tax planning arrangements or structures that i) set out to achieve results that are contrary to the clear intention of Parliament in enacting relevant legislation and/or ii) are highly artificial or highly contrived and seek to exploit shortcomings within the relevant legislation.”

In light of such a change in attitudes, Lord Clyde might be turning in his grave.

Danby Bloch is chairman at Helm Godfrey

Recommended

Magnifying-Glass-And-Text-Kindle-Contract-700x450.jpg
8

Advisers call for clarity on unacceptable tax avoidance

Advisers say they want clarity around what is acceptable and non-acceptable tax avoidance after the Government announced plans to fine those promoting tax avoidance schemes. Earlier this week, a consultation from HM Revenue & Customs set out plans to clamp down on advisers in its list of “tax avoidance enablers”. It proposed penalties for those found […]

George-Osborne-sips-from-coffee-cup-700.jpg

Govt more than £600m behind tax avoidance targets

Government measures to clamp down on tax avoidance are bringing in £615m less than originally forecast, according to an analysis from the Office for Budget Responsibility. In an investigation of successive measures to clampdown on avoidance introduced since 2010, the OBR found that none of the plans had brought in more than expected, with many falling […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. This is especially damning when you consider that whilst necessary, all taxation is by definition legalised and legally enforced theft with menaces.

    Also when you consider the moral responsibility of government to spend as little money as it possible to provide taxpayers with the services that government needs to provide.

    Unfortunately socialistic attitudes seem to have taken hold of vast numbers of people and many seem to forget that the only place the government gets money from is out of their pockets or by selling things that they the taxpayer legally owns.

    I can only hope that part of the apparent political shift of recent times is a move back towards smaller government as taxation by its’ very nature is immoral and should therefore be minimised in any decent society.

  2. Push too hard and the fattest geese will find another nest. Aggressive tax collecting is no more acceptable than aggressive tax avoidance.

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com