I enjoyed my visit to RSM Tenon this morning.
We had a good debate. Discussion was lively. Not everyone agreed with me - of course. But my opponent - Ian Harris - changed his mind on the duty of companies.
And I was persuaded that the reason why councils litigate is that they genuinely believe on occasion that H M Revenue & Customs are just wrong.
I'm not convinced of that in the Isle of Wight car parking case I referred to - and the people from the Isle of Wight who were present were gracious in discussion - but we had to differ on something.
What was really interesting though was where the discussion lead. My suggestion that councils be barred from litigating was well received - including by the partners at RSM Tenon - on condition that there was a second part to the proposal, which was that HMRC had in that case to offer public bodies speedy binding arbitration instead. Wouldn't that make sense? Just think what the saving to the Exchequer might be if all that wasted effort was avoided - as it could be with this one, simple idea.
Anyone from HMRC like to comment?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I suspect your agreement to “speedy binding arbitration” in this case is because of the circular public sector conflict where you are just moving money between arms of the State.
How about arbitration for conflicts with HMRC and the general public or companies?
Not so keen then I would guess as you want the power balance in future to be all in the Revenue’s favour…..
I suspect others would not want it