Archive for May, 2013

h1

Open tax consultations

May 29, 2013

Here are the four from HMRC:

Title Link Date of closure
Changes to VAT zero-rating of exports from the UK Link here 5 July 2013
National insurance and self-employed entertainers Link here 6 August 2013
A review of two aspects of the tax rules on Partnerships Link here 9 August 2013
Office of Tax Simplification: review of unapproved share schemes Link here 16 August 2013

(One day I’ll work out how to do pretty tables in WordPress, sorry!)

There are a couple of interesting things about this list, over and above my general gripes about the problems of finding them in the first place.

Note the closing dates?  The earliest one is 37 days away, and the others are 69, 72 and 79 days respectively.  The days of a three month (90 day) consultation are over, and the concern about consultations over holiday periods haven’t quite sunk in  yet.

Also… where are the rest?  Look at table 2.1 (starting on page 64 here) of Budget Policy Decisions.  Ignore the measures already announced and skip down to the heading “Growth and enterprise” and look from there to the end of the table.  I make it 29 measures from there on down which are categorised as “tax” (as opposed to spending) changes.  Then look at OOTLAR (Overview of Tax Legislation and Rates) published at the same time and go to chapter two, Future Tax Changes (start on page 18) where you will find 47 announcements, some of which will and some of which won’t lead to consultations.

Oh, and look at this, published in the same chapter, back in March:

2.1 This chapter summarises new tax changes announced in Budget 2013, where the change is to be made in Finance Bill 2014, other future finance bills, programme bills or secondary legislation. In line with the Government’s new approach to tax policy making, the vast majority of these measures will be subject to consultation. To assist those who wish to take part in tax consultations, a “tracker” will be published on the HM Treasury and HMRC websites setting out the planned dates of future consultations.

Well where’s my bloody tracker then????

h1

Gov.uk

May 28, 2013

What do we think about the new! improved! all-singing, all-dancing! government website, gov.uk?

I only ask because, of course, all the government’s tax consultations have been moved onto the new site, and because of the suggestion – which also became a recommendation by the House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee – that there should be a single government website listing ALL consultations in the order of the date of closure.

Because – as I have previously mentioned – if you go here, to the consultation page, you have to filter first to get “consultations” from the welter of other “publications”, and then you have to filter again by department (not subject) to get HMRC and HMT consultations, and even then there’s no way of filtering out tax consultations from other Treasury consultations.

However this gives you a list of (today, at least) 19 HMRC consultations and 89 HMT consultations – but of the HMRC 19 there are only four open consultations, as against 10 “closed consultations” and four “consultation outcomes”, and HMT has 5 open consultations, 45 “consultation outcomes” and 39 “closed consultations”.  Wouldn’t it be great if you could just filter by “open consultations” and THEN by Department and get to the nine you were actually interested in?

I had assumed the functionality wasn’t there on the website and that, in response to the House of Lords Committee’s recommendations, they’d be working on it when and if resources allowed.

And then I came across this page, on Getting Involved, where there is a running tally of open consultations telling me there are, currently, 55 open consultations across the government, or at least across government departments and agencies that have moved their web presence over to the Gov.uk site.

So the functionality to identify open consultations IS there somewhere, but isn’t being used in a way that would actually be useful to the users of the site?  You’d almost think it was deliberate…

h1

Closing the enquiry centres: the final response

May 24, 2013

Don’t forget that today is the last day to make your feelings known about the proposal to close HMRC’s face to face enquiry centres.  Here’s what I sent:

This is an individual response and is also published online, with commentary, on my blog http://tiintax.com.  There were four earlier blog posts on this issue which you might also find interesting to read.

1.  You have not included the question of *whether* contact centres should be closed within the scope of your consultation, presumably because the decision has already been taken.  However you say you will evaluate the “pilot” closure before proceeding further.  Given that the research on which your decision is based is only into the “always needs help” population (and does not include those of us who are “willing but need help” occasionally) I strongly suggest you include some customers in the group evaluating the pilot closure.  In particular, you ought to assess the impact on customers in your “willing and able” and “willing but needs help” categories as well as on the “always needs help” group.  You should do this by appointing an external scrutiny panel to work with you on the evaluation.  This should include trades union representatives and civil society groups from the affected area.
2. Here are the answers to your specific questions.  However you should note that your consultation document has some accessibility issues, for instance the inability to convert it to another format (e.g. at the simplest level, to copy and paste from it into an email) and is not in accordance with best practice.
Q1 Have we missed any particular groups in our definition of customers who need extra help?
This is a fundamentally misconceived question.  The enquiry centres support ALL of HMRC’s customers, not only those who need “extra” help.  Your proposals do not seem to allow for any service offering other than telephone and the web for anyone except “customers who need extra help” and so I suppose my answer is that the group you have missed is, everyone else!
Q2.  What do you think are the main benefits and disadvantages of the proposed new approach?
Clearly the main advantage is that you will “save” some £60 million a year in operating costs by closing the enquiry centres.  The main disadvantage is that you are diverting some £60 million a year away from customer service without any clear advantage in return.  The ordinary citizen has, surely, a right to a service from HMRC that enables them to pay their taxes efficiently.  Unless you can radically improve your basic service level offering over the phone and on the net, you are effectively taking £60m “savings” by putting the costs onto service users and civil society organisations.
The consultation also suggests to me that “ordinary” taxpayers are being offered a “take it or leave it” service and that the decision whether a person requires “extra” help will rest with HMRC rather than the service user.  This is deeply offensive – for example, I have a mild hearing impairment.  At present I can decide for myself whether I am able to transact with you over the phone or require further assistance either in person or otherwise.  Under your proposals it seems I will have to explain my impairment to a call centre operative and let THEM decide whether I’m disabled ENOUGH to be offered assistance.  I consider this is not only a “disadvantage” of your proposals but is likely to be in breach of your  statutory obligation to provide reasonable adjustment to citizens with disabilities.
Q3  Could any particular groups of customers find it difficult to contact HMRC using the new service?
Um… all of them?
Q4.  How do you suggest we can overcome any difficulties?
By treating taxpayers and service users as citizens with rights, rather than customers.
Q5  How else could we improve the proposed new service?
Ask the people affected at regular intervals.  Use citizen juries to check your conclusions.  Establish an oversight committee with representatives from civil society groups, trades unions and other affected parties to report back on progress.
Q6  What else could we do to improve:
(a) our new extra support telephone adviser service
(b) direction of certain customers to the voluntary sector and vice versa
(c ) the flexibility of our approach to providing support for those customers who need it?
A – see A5, above
B and C – these seem to me to be fundamentally misconceived questions.  HMRC should not be abandoning customers by telling them to eff off and talk to a charity – you have a duty of care towards all the citizens who transact with you, and “flexibility” is not, in and of itself, a positive to which you should aspire.  What you should be aspiring to is a satisfactory service (or, preferably, a better than satisfactory, i.e. a GOOD service) to ALL citizens of the uk.
Q7  Are there any other factors we need to take into account when trying to identify people who need extra help?
It is not your place to “identify” people who need extra help: people should be able to access help according to their own assessment of their needs, and you should be meeting those needs in accordance with the concept of all citizens having equal rights.
Q8.  Is there anything more we need to do to make sure that customers who currently use our Enquiry Centres, but don’t need extra help to resolve their query, can access our services?
You need to make substantial improvements to both your web and telephone offerings.  You might try a number of approaches, including but not limited to:
  • using citizen juries and other feedback mechanisms to improve your web presence
  • using basic feedback forms to capture feedback from users of the website in order to improve it
  • responding to enquiries submitted via email, twitter and other social media platforms and aggregating any frequently asked questions to create a dynamic feedback loop to improve your website
  • experiment with actually answering your phones (rather than filtering calls via recorded message trees)
  • take note of the research with clearly indicates that people dislike multilayered menus and voice recognition systems and increase the number of actual human beings responding to calls
Q9.  Are there any impacts on particular groups of customers that we have not identified and that need to be addressed?
Yes: people who need one-off help do not appear to be well served by the suggested new service.
Q10 How do you suggest we can overcome these?
See 8, above.
Q11.  Are there any other groups of customers that we have not included in our considerations.  If so, please specify who they are and let us know what we need to take into account in respect of these groups.
See 9 above.
Q12.  What other methods of communicating the consultation response should we be considering?
Seriously?  You’re going to close down the face to face service and you’re asking us how we prefer you to tell us?  How about “in a hundred years time”?
h1

Um… hello?

May 10, 2013

efficient secondary legislation and engagement with the public through the medium of consultation is, in my view, the very bedrock of an effective and inclusive parliamentary democracy.  (The Earl of Lytton, Hansard  11 March 2013 Column GC34)

 

Maybe I’ve just lost my google-fu, my ability to find stuff on the internet? I don’t know.  I’ve been busy with the day job (I’m a PhD student by day and a writer of science fiction and fantasy by night) so maybe I’ve taken my eye off the ball.  But it occurred to me lately that, as well as finishing off my responses to the consultation on closure of the HMRC enquiry centres (the consultation closes on 24th May and I’ve already blogged about it here, here and here.  Oh, and here.  Not to mention here.) I should also check out what other tax consultations are around and plan what work I’m going to do on this blog over the next few weeks and months.

Um… hello?

So there doesn’t seem to be a tax tracker on the HMT pages any more.  The Treasury has moved all its consultations over to the new GOV.UK website, and the links on the Treasury site now take you to the consultations search page on GOV.UK, here.

Which might be helpful, except that, at the time of writing, there are 991 documents under the “consultations” heading on that page, they include open consultations, closed consultations, and consultation responses (and there’s no way to filter by “open consultations”).  Oh, and they’re in date order – of the date they were published and not by the date which would actually be useful, ie the date that the consultation closes.  (Has anyone told the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee? (see para 54 here))

Filtering this with “tax and revenue” as the topic brings up five documents, the enquiry centre closure consultation and four closed consultations.

Well OK then.  Filtering it again by department, brings up 87 documents under HMT, only three of which are open consultations. (Two on finance industry topics, the “special administration regime for payment and settlement systems”, and one on “opening up UK payments” which I may go back to, because from a cursory glance it looks to be about abolishing cheques) and – finally – a relevant one, yet another tweak to the REITs regime, the rules on Real Estate Investment Trusts.

Filtering it by department again but this time scrolling down to find HMRC brings up fifteen results.  Only one of those is an open consultation, and it’s our old friend “Supporting Customers Who Need Extra Help: A New Approach”, which is newspeak for “Closing the Enquiry Centres”

But look back at this time last year.  In April and May 2012 I was responding to a dozen open consultations resulting from Budget announcements and pointing out that there were no fewer than 21 formal consultations which were listed on the tracker as being due to open in May.

So where are the 2013 consultations?  Were there no tax changes announced in the 2013 Budget?  (They weren’t all consulted on in a fortnight via twitter while I wasn’t looking, were they???)

The HMRC Budget 2013 page says all consultations will be on the GOV.UK site.

So, um… hello?  Where are they?