{"id":25174,"date":"2014-06-19T09:33:54","date_gmt":"2014-06-19T08:33:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=25174"},"modified":"2014-06-19T09:34:24","modified_gmt":"2014-06-19T08:34:24","slug":"the-nhs-procurement-and-tax-again","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2014\/06\/19\/the-nhs-procurement-and-tax-again\/","title":{"rendered":"The NHS, procurement and tax (again)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Heather Self of Pinsent Masons, solicitors, has sent me the linked note on tax \u00a0 and procurement <\/a>that her firm has produced. This is in response to my blog earlier today \u00a0on whether an NHS Clinical Commissioning Group can consider taxation and tax avoidance activity in its bidding process<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Pinsent \u00a0Masons' \u00a0document is useful, so I am more than happy to link to it, but it does refer to the very lame scheme on this issue that was produced by the government when it realised that its initial proposal was almost certainly contrary to EU law. \u00a0I am also cognisant of that law, and wary of its consequences, as I note in my blog.<\/p>\n

As for the government scheme, I think it \u00a0almost meaningless: it refers to the GAAR \u00a0when there have been no cases as yet, \u00a0and to packaged tax avoidance schemes when these are relatively rarely undertaken by companies, most being targeted at individuals. There are \u00a0also generous opt out clauses.<\/p>\n

In that case the proposal that I have made is quite different, but I think almost certainly legal, because it asks for the disclosure of information relevant to the decision to be made on the contract to be undertaken, and that must be appropriate under EU law. \u00a0By \u00a0making the focus \u00a0of disclosure the durability of any structure that is tax driven my criteria means that a decision to accept or reject a proposal can be appropriately made upon the basis of the tax planning inherent within \u00a0the contract bid and the assessment of the risks that it poses to the durability of the benefit to be provided. \u00a0This, I think, makes my proposed criteria considerably more powerful than those that the government suggests.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Heather Self of Pinsent Masons, solicitors, has sent me the linked note on tax \u00a0 and procurement that her firm has produced. This is in
 Read the full article…<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[128,10,32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25174","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-nhs","category-tax-avoidance","category-tax-havens"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25174","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25174"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25174\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25174"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25174"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25174"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}