Accountancy Age comments on a price I saw in the Telegraph yesterday, saying:
HM Revenue and Customs has been criticised for guidance it has released to assist homosexual and transgender taxpayers.
The 20-page document has been labelled by critics an unnecessary use of taxpayers' money. It advises people in civil partnerships about their tax allowance and inheritance tax thresholds, according to The Telegraph.
It also gives advice to transgender people about claiming pensions under their old or new gender.
All of which is pretty important to those involved, and is information they need. Except of course, no one who has ever read the Torygraph has ever, of course, met a gay or lesbian person, let alone someone who has undergone a sex change. Nor it seems have my old friends the so-called TaxPayer’s Alliance
Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the pressure group TaxPayers' Alliance, said: 'HMRC is meant to produce simple, clear guidance for everyone, not spend extra money going out of their way to target particular minorities.'
I guess the TPA have never seen the plethora of guides HMRC produce, many of them quite good (and of course, there are exceptions, I know). So what they show is this:
a) they don’t know what they’re talking about
b) they’re not interested in people paying the right amount of tax
c) they don’t like minorities.
I guess that sums up the state of play quite well as far as the TPA is concerned.
For the real story visit The Other Taxpayer’s Alliance — altogether better.
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:
Buy me a coffee!
Call me old-fashioned, but why can’t civil partnerships be deemed exactly the same as marriage for HMRC purposes. And shouldn’t we pay the same tax whether we are male, female or transgender? Can’t see why this advice should run to 20 pages.
Seems to me the Telegraph are right on this, though almost certainly for the wrong reasons.
TPA with their nonsense again, and it’s good to see that Accountancy Age is being so progressive about it.
I will be reading the HMRC guidance as have no clue on the subject, thank you for bringing it my attention.
I don’t fit your stereotype of ‘anyone who has ever read” the Telegraph Richard. Excessive hyperbole on YOUR part perhaps? 😉
Having said that I entirely agree with your view on the issue and your rejection of the TPA’s predictably irrational response to the story.
Mark
No, I don’t think so
It was irony
Richard
But seriously, do you get different tax treatment based on your sexuality/gender or on whether you have an “old fashioned” marriage or a civil partnership?
If so, aren’t your rules a little bit more compelx than they need to be?
Would I be right in saying that a civil partnership is now treated the same as a marriage for tax purposes?
e.g. civil partners can pass assets to each other free of CGT, an estate can be left to a civil partner free of IHT?
So why is such extensive guidance needed?
The transgender issue might be a bit more complicated if the person in question e.g. became a man after paying the reduced rate of NIC for married women (unlikely but possible)? So I can see why more guidance might be needed there.
M
M
You might know that
But suppose you didn’t
Wouldn’t it help to have information that told you?
Never forget the importance of stating the bleeding obvious
Richard
Take your fair point, Richard – it is obvious to me because I’m an accountant 🙂
But surely it could be said in one paragraph – not 20 pages?
M