Difference between revisions of "Introduction"

From TFD Online 2024-25
Jump to: navigation, search
(The year 2015/16 in review)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Scope of this book==
 
==Scope of this book==
 
  
  
 
There are three themes to this book:
 
There are three themes to this book:
 
  
  
Line 12: Line 10:
  
 
(3)  Taxation of UK residents on foreign assets
 
(3)  Taxation of UK residents on foreign assets
 +
  
  
 +
To attempt to cover these topics comprehensively is ambitious, perhaps quixotic. This book is in danger of bursting, particularly because these territorial issues can only sensibly be discussed in a wider context.  But one cannot address the first topic without the second and third: in taxation, as in life, everything is connected. Thus what started as a book on foreign domiciliaries has become a book which seeks to address all the territorial limits to UK taxation.
  
To attempt to cover these topics comprehensively is ambitious, perhaps rather quixotic. This book is in danger of bursting, particularly because these territorial issues can only sensibly be discussed in a wider context.  But one cannot address the first topic without the second and third: in taxation, as in life, everything is connected. Thus what started as a book on foreign domiciliaries has become a book which seeks to address all the territorial limits to UK taxation.
 
  
 +
==The year 2016/17 in review==
  
  
==Brexit==
+
OTS stated in 2017:
  
 +
The UK tax code is widely cited as being the longest in the world”.<ref>It is hard to empirically assess the claim that the UK has the longest tax code in the world, and OTS makes no attempt to do so.  But if any readers ae aware of other serious contenders for that title, I would be interested to hear.</ref> 
  
 +
This claim had been made at least since 2010.<ref>For the older references see the Introduction to the 15th (2016/17) of this work.</ref>  In recent years Parliament added:<ref>Finance Act page counts are a rough proxy for the ever growing complexity of the UK tax system, but not an altogether bad one.  A (slightly) better proxy would also consider secondary legislation and HMRC guidance; and, perhaps, case law; then the page counts would multiply the Finance Act numbers set out here tenfold.
 +
For a discussion of the multidimensional concept of tax complexity, see Tran-Nam and Evans, “Towards the Development of a Tax System Complexity Index” (2014) Fiscal Studies Vol 35 p.341.
 +
The OTS have published two (somewhat simplistic) discussions of tax complexity:
 +
Length of Tax Legislation as a Measure of  Complexity (Apr 2012) 
 +
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193496/ots_length_legislation_paper.pdf
 +
The OTS Complexity Index (2012)
 +
http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193493/ots_complexity_index_methodology_paper.pdf</ref>
  
The referendum of 23 June 2016 is a decision of immense significance.  We face an extended period of uncertainty, in politics, economics, law and taxation. Readers may agree with Martin Wolf,  chief economics commentator at the FT, who commented on the day after the referendum (I omit some of his invective):
 
 
 
 
:The Conservatives will now end up with new leadership.  They will then have to do what the Brexiters failed ... to do during their ...  campaign, namely, map out a strategy and tactics for unravelling the UK's connections with the EU.  This will probably consume the energies of that government and its successors over many years.<ref>Financial Times, 24 June 2016.</ref>
 
 
 
 
In the medium and long term, say the next 5-10 years, changes will be profound.  In the short term - for the next two years or so - matters will proceed more or less as in the past. 
 
 
 
 
==The year 2015/16 in review==
 
 
 
 
The chancellor stated in 2011:
 
 
 
 
:Our tax code has become so complex that it recently overtook India to become the longest in the world.<ref>Budget speech 2011. It is hard to empirically assess a claim that the UK has the longest tax code in the world, but there seem to be no other serious contenders for that title.</ref> 
 
 
 
 
Parliament subsequently added:
 
  
 
:{|
 
:{|
Line 61: Line 44:
 
| FAs 2015: || 562 pages
 
| FAs 2015: || 562 pages
 
|-
 
|-
| FA 2016:  || 583 pages
+
| FA 2016:  || 649 pages
 +
|-
 +
| F 2017: || 776 (a new record)<ref>This is the size of the original Finance Bill 2017.</ref>
 
|}
 
|}
  
In the same period, the OTS has achieved little.<ref>See eg IFS, "OTS: Looking Back and Looking Forward" TLRC Discussion Paper No. 11 (2014) tactfully referring to "insufficient buy-in to the simplification process by HMRC, HM Treasury and government".
 
  
<i>http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/TLRC/TLRC_OTS_DP_11.pdf</i>  
+
In the same period, OTS has not achieved anything perceptible, at least in relation to the topics covered in this book. <ref>See eg IFS, “OTS: Looking Back and Looking Forward” TLRC Discussion Paper No. 11 (2014) tactfully referring to “insufficient buy-in to the simplification process by HMRC, HM Treasury and government”.
 +
<i>http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/TLRC/TLRC_OTS_DP_11.pdf</i>  
 +
In (I think) 2013 the government came up with the slogan “Creating a simpler, fairer tax system” under which the OTS now operates; which imagines away a troubling reality in which simplicity and fairness are competing values which require hard choices.
 +
<i>https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-simpler-fairer-tax-system</i> </ref>
 +
It is easier to <i>talk</i> of simplification:
  
In (I think) 2013 the government came up with the slogan "Creating a simpler, fairer tax system" under which the OTS now operates; which imagines away a troubling reality in which simplicity and fairness are competing values which require hard choices.
+
Our system remains too complicated ... We will therefore simplify the tax system. <ref>Conservative party manifesto 2017 p.14
 +
</ref>
  
<i>https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-simpler-fairer-tax-system</i> </ref>
+
The reader may think that the satirists better identify the reality:
  
The choice of India as comparator was strange.<ref>The comparison seems to originate from CIOT, "The Making of Tax Law" (2010) para 3.3,<i> http://old.tax.org.uk/ciot_media/themakingoftaxlaw.pdf</i>.</ref> Four years of Indian Finance Acts together are shorter than any single UK finance act since 1999.<ref>Finance Act page counts are a rough proxy for the ever growing complexity of the UK tax system, but not an altogether bad one.  A (slightly) better proxy would also consider secondary legislation and HMRC guidance; and, perhaps, case law; then the page counts would far exceed the Finance Act numbers set out here. 
+
We will further complicate the UK tax system so that large companies can no longer find loopholes. <ref Official Monster Raving Loony Party Manifesto 2017
 +
<i>https://www.loonyparty.com/2017-general-election-manicfesto</i>></ref>
  
For a discussion of the multidimensional concept of tax complexity, see Tran-Nam and Evans, "Towards the Development of a Tax System Complexity Index" (2014) Fiscal Studies Vol 35 p.341.
+
Scotland continues its fiscal drift from the UK, with Northern Ireland and Wales set to follow.
 +
The F(no.2)A 2017 has introduced deemed domicile rules, rewritten the taxation of offshore trusts, and extended IHT to companies holding UK residential property.
 +
The courts have decided many interesting cases, including <i>Barclays Wealth v HMRC</i>, <i>R (Hely-Hutchinson) v HRMC, Lee v HMRC and Children’s Investment Fund Foundation v AG.</i>
 +
OECD has produced the BEPS convention, noting, I think correctly:
  
The OTS have published two (somewhat simplistic) discussions of tax complexity:
+
International tax issues have never been as high on the political agenda as they are today.
  
<i>Length of Tax Legislation as a Measure of  Complexity </i>(Apr 2012) 
+
<i>The future</i>
 
+
<i>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193496/ots_length_legislation_paper.pdf</i>
+
 
+
The OTS Complexity Index (2012)
+
 
+
<i>http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193493/ots_complexity_index_methodology_paper.pdf</i></ref>  The graph speaks for itself.
+
 
+
It is easier to <i>talk</i> of simplification.  Budget 2014 used the word simplification 23 times; even including a reference to simplifying partnership taxation!<ref>Budget 2014 para 1.123: "The government's aim is that the tax system is simple to understand and easy to comply with. ... the government will ... simplify the taxation of employee benefits and expenses, employee share schemes and partnerships."</ref> Those who have wrestled with the FA 2014 partnership provisions may smile, grimly.  In Budget 2015 the word was used 17 times, rising to 36 times in Budget 2016.
+
 
+
Scotland continues its fiscal drift from the UK, with Wales set to follow in due course.
+
 
+
The FA 2016 has abolished tax credits, a far reaching reform on dividend taxation, reduced CGT rates, and (yet again) recast the transactions in securities rules.  It has extended the scope of taxation of royalties and transactions in UK land.
+
 
+
An (I think, novel) development is the enactment of tax reliefs whose effect, or full effect, is postponed until 2020, election year, with a view to minimising cost and maximising political benefit.  Examples are the reduction in CT rates; the IHT residence nil rate band (which may claim a prize for unnecessary tax complication); and investors's relief for CGT.
+
 
+
The Courts have decided many interesting cases, including:
+
 
+
:<i> Bowring v HMRC</i> [2015] UKUT 550 (TCC) upholding flip-flop schemes.
+
 
+
<i>Hely-Hutchinson, R (oao) v HMRC</i>  [2015] EWHC 3261 (Admin) requiring fairness where HMRC withdraw a statement of practice or concession.
+
 
+
In the last edition of this work I said <i>Anson v HMRC</i> has resolved the status of US LLCs.  How wrong!  HMRC have announced that they do not intend to follow the Supreme Court decision, so the dispute will continue for another round. 
+
 
+
More wisely, and as anticipated in this work, HMRC backtracked on its  demand to repay pre-2014 loans secured on foreign income/gains or face the penalty of a remittance basis charge.
+
 
+
The OECD has produced its final set of BEPS reports, noting, I think correctly, that "International tax issues have never been as high on the political agenda as they are today."
+
 
+
2017 will bring the commencement of the new deemed domicile rule and IHT transparency for companies, unexpected announcements in Summer Budget 2015.
+
 
+
We will continue to live in fiscally exciting times.
+
 
+
==Thanks ...and request for help==
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
I am very grateful to my colleagues in chambers, especially Robert Venables QC, Amanda Hardy QC and Philip Simpson QC, for discussions on many aspects of tax.  Emma Lidström undertook the daunting task of copy editor.  I owe a great debt to Jane Hunt and Ruth Shaw who work patiently on this challenging text throughout the year.
+
 
+
Comments from readers and professional clients continue to be of the greatest value and interest to the author.
+
 
+
The pleasure in writing this book consists in the interest of the questions which it raises, and the success which it may have achieved in answering them.  This online version seeks to state the law as at 1 September 2016.
+
  
 +
Autumn budget 2016 announced an unexpected proposal to move non-resident companies from IT to the corporation tax regime. This might be necessary while the UK remains in the EU to avoid freedom of establishment issues of taxing foreign companies more than UK ones.  But it will add to complexity, and the length of this book.  CT is a more sophisticated tax than IT, in many respects, in particular the taxation of interest (loan relationships) and hybrids.  Private client practitioners advising foreign companies will have to master CT rules which hitherto they could leave for corporate tax practitioners.
 +
The government will have to map out a strategy and tactics for unravelling the UK’s connections with the EU.  This is a daunting task, and will take a generation if not more.  We face an extended period of uncertainty, in politics, economics, law and taxation.
 +
We will continue to live in fiscally exciting times.
  
 +
<i>==Thanks ...and request for help==</i>
  
 +
I am very grateful to my colleagues in chambers, especially Robert Venables QC, Amanda Hardy QC and Philip Simpson QC, for discussions on many aspects of tax.  Yakshini Peerthum as research assistant resolved many puzzles .  I owe a great debt to Jane Hunt and Ruth Shaw who work patiently on this challenging text throughout the year.
 +
Comments from readers and professional clients continue to be of the greatest value and interest to the author.
 +
The pleasure in writing this book consists in the interest of the questions which it raises, and the success which it may have achieved in answering them.  It seeks to state the law as at 1 December 2017.
  
  
Line 133: Line 93:
  
 
WC2A 3UE
 
WC2A 3UE
 
  
  
Line 139: Line 98:
  
  
 +
http://www.kessler.co.uk</i>
  
http://www.kessler.co.uk</i>
 
  
 
==OBTAINING FURTHER ADVICE - AND DISCLAIMER==
 
==OBTAINING FURTHER ADVICE - AND DISCLAIMER==
 
  
  
 
==Further advice==
 
==Further advice==
 
  
  
Line 153: Line 110:
  
 
In particular, you may instruct the author to advise.  I enjoy writing, but spend most of my time giving independent specialist professional advice in private client matters, especially areas covered in this work. For further details see <i>http://www.kessler.co.uk</i>.
 
In particular, you may instruct the author to advise.  I enjoy writing, but spend most of my time giving independent specialist professional advice in private client matters, especially areas covered in this work. For further details see <i>http://www.kessler.co.uk</i>.
 
  
  
 
==TFD Online==
 
==TFD Online==
 
  
  
Line 167: Line 122:
  
 
(3)  to correct or contribute to the book
 
(3)  to correct or contribute to the book
 
  
  
 
TFD Online is moderated by Oliver Marre, a member of Tax Chambers, 15 Old Square, Lincoln's Inn.  
 
TFD Online is moderated by Oliver Marre, a member of Tax Chambers, 15 Old Square, Lincoln's Inn.  
  
TFD Online is accessible on <i>http://www.foreigndomiciliaries.co.uk</i>.  An authorisation code is in the inside cover of this volume.
+
TFD Online is accessible on <i>http://www.foreigndomiciliaries.co.uk</i>.  An authorisation code for a 3 week trial period is in the inside cover of this volume.
 
+
  
  
 
==Disclaimer==
 
==Disclaimer==
 
  
  
Line 183: Line 135:
  
  
 +
:While every care has been taken in the preparation of this guidance the PCRT Bodies do not undertake a duty of care or otherwise (?) for any loss or damage occasioned by reliance on this guidance.  Practical guidance cannot and should no be taken to substitute appropriate legal advice.<ref>CIOT, <i>Professional Conduct in Relation to Taxation</i> (2015), para 1.10
  
:While every care has been taken in the preparation of this guidance CIOT ... do not undertake a duty of care or otherwise (?) for any loss or damage occasioned by reliance on this guidance.<ref>CIOT, <i>Professional Conduct in Relation to Taxation</i> (2015), para 1.10
+
<i>http://www.tax.org.uk/professional-standards/professional-rules/professional-conduct-relation-taxation</i>
  
<i>http://www.tax.org.uk/Resources/CIOT/Documents/2015/05/PCRT%20final%20CIOTATT%202015.pdf</i>
+
The second sentence is an improvement on the common but rather bizarre form that guidance on legal issues “does not constitute legal advice”.
 +
 
 +
The Law Society likewise issue a disclaimer for their Practice Notes: The standard form is: “While care has been taken to ensure that they are accurate, up to date and useful, the Law Society will not accept any legal liability in relation to them.</i>
  
 
The Law Society make a similar disclaimer for their Practice Notes: The standard form is: "While care has been taken to ensure that they are accurate, up to date and useful, the Law Society will not accept any legal liability in relation to them." </ref>
 
The Law Society make a similar disclaimer for their Practice Notes: The standard form is: "While care has been taken to ensure that they are accurate, up to date and useful, the Law Society will not accept any legal liability in relation to them." </ref>
 
  
  
 
When that appeared in 2011 it seemed extraordinary.  But it rapidly became ubiquitous; nowadays no professional body ever issues guidance without a disclaimer (often including a statement, which seems bizarre to me, that guidance on the law "does not constitute legal advice".)  Similarly, and <i>a fortiori</i>, the views expressed in this book are put forward for consideration only and are not to be relied upon.  Neither the author nor the publisher accept any responsibility for any loss to any person arising as a result of any action or omission in reliance of this work.  But could anyone have thought that a claim could arise in absence of this disclaimer?
 
When that appeared in 2011 it seemed extraordinary.  But it rapidly became ubiquitous; nowadays no professional body ever issues guidance without a disclaimer (often including a statement, which seems bizarre to me, that guidance on the law "does not constitute legal advice".)  Similarly, and <i>a fortiori</i>, the views expressed in this book are put forward for consideration only and are not to be relied upon.  Neither the author nor the publisher accept any responsibility for any loss to any person arising as a result of any action or omission in reliance of this work.  But could anyone have thought that a claim could arise in absence of this disclaimer?
 
  
  
 
==A note to the lay reader==
 
==A note to the lay reader==
 
  
  
 
This book is not intended as a self-help guide, and is addressed to tax practitioners, but it is readable for a lay person. Initiation in these matters must often be by the taxpayer.  If you wish to research this subject in depth, and so take more control of your own tax affairs, read on.  But for implementation you will need to find professionals to advise you. Self-help guides extol "the benefit of bypassing expensive lawyers"; but the bypass may prove the more expensive route in the long run.   
 
This book is not intended as a self-help guide, and is addressed to tax practitioners, but it is readable for a lay person. Initiation in these matters must often be by the taxpayer.  If you wish to research this subject in depth, and so take more control of your own tax affairs, read on.  But for implementation you will need to find professionals to advise you. Self-help guides extol "the benefit of bypassing expensive lawyers"; but the bypass may prove the more expensive route in the long run.   
 
  
  
 
==Edition history==
 
==Edition history==
 
  
  
Line 217: Line 167:
  
  
 
+
This book was called <i>Taxation of Foreign Domiciliaries</i> for 9 editions; it changed to <i>Taxation of Non-Residents and  Foreign Domiciliaries</i> in the 10<sup>th</sup> edition.
 
+
 
+
This book was called <i>Taxation of Foreign Domiciliaries</i> for 9 editions; it changed to <i>Taxation of Non-residents & Foreign Domiciliaries</i> in the 10<sup>th</sup> edition.
+
  
 
== Footnotes==
 
== Footnotes==
 
  
  
 
<references/>
 
<references/>

Revision as of 14:19, 5 September 2017

Scope of this book

There are three themes to this book:


(1) Taxation of foreign domiciliaries

(2) Taxation of non-residents on UK assets

(3) Taxation of UK residents on foreign assets


To attempt to cover these topics comprehensively is ambitious, perhaps quixotic. This book is in danger of bursting, particularly because these territorial issues can only sensibly be discussed in a wider context. But one cannot address the first topic without the second and third: in taxation, as in life, everything is connected. Thus what started as a book on foreign domiciliaries has become a book which seeks to address all the territorial limits to UK taxation.


The year 2016/17 in review

OTS stated in 2017:

The UK tax code is widely cited as being the longest in the world”.[1]

This claim had been made at least since 2010.[2] In recent years Parliament added:[3]


FA 2011: 403 pages
FA 2012: 703 pages (a record)
FA 2013: 648 pages
FA 2014: 663 pages
FAs 2015: 562 pages
FA 2016: 649 pages
F 2017: 776 (a new record)[4]


In the same period, OTS has not achieved anything perceptible, at least in relation to the topics covered in this book. [5]

It is easier to talk of simplification:

Our system remains too complicated ... We will therefore simplify the tax system. [6]

The reader may think that the satirists better identify the reality:

We will further complicate the UK tax system so that large companies can no longer find loopholes. [7]

Scotland continues its fiscal drift from the UK, with Northern Ireland and Wales set to follow. The F(no.2)A 2017 has introduced deemed domicile rules, rewritten the taxation of offshore trusts, and extended IHT to companies holding UK residential property. The courts have decided many interesting cases, including Barclays Wealth v HMRC, R (Hely-Hutchinson) v HRMC, Lee v HMRC and Children’s Investment Fund Foundation v AG. OECD has produced the BEPS convention, noting, I think correctly:

International tax issues have never been as high on the political agenda as they are today.

The future

Autumn budget 2016 announced an unexpected proposal to move non-resident companies from IT to the corporation tax regime. This might be necessary while the UK remains in the EU to avoid freedom of establishment issues of taxing foreign companies more than UK ones. But it will add to complexity, and the length of this book. CT is a more sophisticated tax than IT, in many respects, in particular the taxation of interest (loan relationships) and hybrids. Private client practitioners advising foreign companies will have to master CT rules which hitherto they could leave for corporate tax practitioners. The government will have to map out a strategy and tactics for unravelling the UK’s connections with the EU. This is a daunting task, and will take a generation if not more. We face an extended period of uncertainty, in politics, economics, law and taxation. We will continue to live in fiscally exciting times.

==Thanks ...and request for help==

I am very grateful to my colleagues in chambers, especially Robert Venables QC, Amanda Hardy QC and Philip Simpson QC, for discussions on many aspects of tax. Yakshini Peerthum as research assistant resolved many puzzles . I owe a great debt to Jane Hunt and Ruth Shaw who work patiently on this challenging text throughout the year. Comments from readers and professional clients continue to be of the greatest value and interest to the author. The pleasure in writing this book consists in the interest of the questions which it raises, and the success which it may have achieved in answering them. It seeks to state the law as at 1 December 2017.


James Kessler QC

Old Square Tax Chambers

15 Old Square

Lincoln's Inn

WC2A 3UE


[email protected]


http://www.kessler.co.uk


OBTAINING FURTHER ADVICE - AND DISCLAIMER

Further advice

If you want advice on which you are legally entitled to rely you can obtain it - but not from this work.

In particular, you may instruct the author to advise. I enjoy writing, but spend most of my time giving independent specialist professional advice in private client matters, especially areas covered in this work. For further details see http://www.kessler.co.uk.


TFD Online

TFD Online is an online version of this book and more. It can be used:

(1) to search the text of this book or to access it online.

(2) to see if the book has been updated

(3) to correct or contribute to the book


TFD Online is moderated by Oliver Marre, a member of Tax Chambers, 15 Old Square, Lincoln's Inn.

TFD Online is accessible on http://www.foreigndomiciliaries.co.uk. An authorisation code for a 3 week trial period is in the inside cover of this volume.


Disclaimer

CIOT issue professional guidance with a disclaimer:


While every care has been taken in the preparation of this guidance the PCRT Bodies do not undertake a duty of care or otherwise (?) for any loss or damage occasioned by reliance on this guidance. Practical guidance cannot and should no be taken to substitute appropriate legal advice.[8]


When that appeared in 2011 it seemed extraordinary. But it rapidly became ubiquitous; nowadays no professional body ever issues guidance without a disclaimer (often including a statement, which seems bizarre to me, that guidance on the law "does not constitute legal advice".) Similarly, and a fortiori, the views expressed in this book are put forward for consideration only and are not to be relied upon. Neither the author nor the publisher accept any responsibility for any loss to any person arising as a result of any action or omission in reliance of this work. But could anyone have thought that a claim could arise in absence of this disclaimer?


A note to the lay reader

This book is not intended as a self-help guide, and is addressed to tax practitioners, but it is readable for a lay person. Initiation in these matters must often be by the taxpayer. If you wish to research this subject in depth, and so take more control of your own tax affairs, read on. But for implementation you will need to find professionals to advise you. Self-help guides extol "the benefit of bypassing expensive lawyers"; but the bypass may prove the more expensive route in the long run.


Edition history

1st Edition 2001 5th Edition 2006 9th edition 2010 13th edition 2014

2nd Edition 2003 6th edition 2007 10th edition 2011 14th edition 2015

3rd Edition 2004 7th edition 2008 11th edition 2012 15th edition 2016

4th Edition 2005 8th edition 2009 12th edition 2013


This book was called Taxation of Foreign Domiciliaries for 9 editions; it changed to Taxation of Non-Residents and Foreign Domiciliaries in the 10th edition.

Footnotes

  1. It is hard to empirically assess the claim that the UK has the longest tax code in the world, and OTS makes no attempt to do so. But if any readers ae aware of other serious contenders for that title, I would be interested to hear.
  2. For the older references see the Introduction to the 15th (2016/17) of this work.
  3. Finance Act page counts are a rough proxy for the ever growing complexity of the UK tax system, but not an altogether bad one. A (slightly) better proxy would also consider secondary legislation and HMRC guidance; and, perhaps, case law; then the page counts would multiply the Finance Act numbers set out here tenfold. For a discussion of the multidimensional concept of tax complexity, see Tran-Nam and Evans, “Towards the Development of a Tax System Complexity Index” (2014) Fiscal Studies Vol 35 p.341. The OTS have published two (somewhat simplistic) discussions of tax complexity: Length of Tax Legislation as a Measure of Complexity (Apr 2012) https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193496/ots_length_legislation_paper.pdf The OTS Complexity Index (2012) http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193493/ots_complexity_index_methodology_paper.pdf
  4. This is the size of the original Finance Bill 2017.
  5. See eg IFS, “OTS: Looking Back and Looking Forward” TLRC Discussion Paper No. 11 (2014) tactfully referring to “insufficient buy-in to the simplification process by HMRC, HM Treasury and government”. http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/TLRC/TLRC_OTS_DP_11.pdf In (I think) 2013 the government came up with the slogan “Creating a simpler, fairer tax system” under which the OTS now operates; which imagines away a troubling reality in which simplicity and fairness are competing values which require hard choices. https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-simpler-fairer-tax-system
  6. Conservative party manifesto 2017 p.14
  7. https://www.loonyparty.com/2017-general-election-manicfesto</i>>
  8. CIOT, Professional Conduct in Relation to Taxation (2015), para 1.10 http://www.tax.org.uk/professional-standards/professional-rules/professional-conduct-relation-taxation The second sentence is an improvement on the common but rather bizarre form that guidance on legal issues “does not constitute legal advice”. The Law Society likewise issue a disclaimer for their Practice Notes: The standard form is: “While care has been taken to ensure that they are accurate, up to date and useful, the Law Society will not accept any legal liability in relation to them.” </i> The Law Society make a similar disclaimer for their Practice Notes: The standard form is: "While care has been taken to ensure that they are accurate, up to date and useful, the Law Society will not accept any legal liability in relation to them."