I admit I've had very little time for the out-going President of the Chartered Institute of Tax, John Cullinane of Deloittes. If he chose he could find an opportunity to make an unhelpful contribution to the tax debate he seemed to take it.
It's good therefore to see that new President Rob Ellerby has said the following, which is very different in tone from his predecessor:
As the tax system becomes more complex and HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) move to a risk-based approach for tax collection, the tax adviser's role has never been more crucial in ensuring that the taxpayer understands their obligations and pays the correct tax.
If that means he's embraced tax compliance (paying the right amount of tax, but no more, in the right place at the right time - with the right place meaning that the economic substance and form of the transaction coincide in a location) then I'll be delighted. Nothing would please me more than to find common ground with someone like the CIoT on this issue.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Richard, you have to remember that CIoT practitioners, amongst others, do ensure tax payers pay the correct amount of tax.
The ‘correct amount of tax’ may be after using some vehicle designed to mitigate the 40% element, but they have ensured the tax payer pays the ‘correct amount of tax’!
Jason
Good to hear from you!
If the economic form and substance of the transaction coincide in a place then if less tax is due than the apparent tax rate implies it is likely that this is what the law intended e.g. accelerated capital allowances have been granted. I can’t argue with that. Politicians may sometimes act inappropriately but I do not ask people to pay more tax than the law requires in the place where it is properly due, subject always of course to full disclosure having been made and no artificial steps having been included in the transaction, the last being a condition of the economic form and substance of the transaction coinciding.
Richard
It’s nice to have been missed, I have been working very hard to pay my tax bill 🙂
It would be nice to see ALL the Institutes speak with one voice and push for the UK tax system to be made more simple and transparent, then there would be no need for Institutes to make statements that members should ensure tax payer pay the correct ax, because the correct tax would be all they can pay.
[…] This is, of course, the definition of tax compliance I have been promoting (here, for example), the right place not needing to be added in this case. […]
Hi Richard and Jason,
I’m sorry I’ve been rather quiet lately too!
I agree absolutely – if the UK tax system were simpler then there’d be no need for loopholes, manipulation and tax avoidance/evasion. Everyone’s obligations would be clearly defined. Period.
And there went a pig just flying past the window.
M