header-logo header-logo

17 June 2021
Categories: Legal News , Tax , Insurance / reinsurance , Profession
printer mail-detail

LNB News: Law Society response: HMRC consultation on raising standards in the tax advice market

Responding to HMRC’s consultation on raising standards in the tax advice market, the Law Society supports the principle of mandatory professional indemnity insurance (PII) for anyone who provides tax advice, so long as the new regime does not create additional burdens for regulated professionals who are already subject to minimum PII requirements.

Lexis®Library update: The changes proposed by HMRC were intended to:

  • improve standards for professional tax advisers
  • provide consumers with greater protections
  • boost confidence in tax advice

The Law Society agrees that introduction of a requirement for anyone providing tax advice to have professional indemnity insurance would satisfy the policy aims of improving trust in the tax advice market, by targeting poor behaviour and allowing taxpayers greater redress when things go wrong.

The Law Society recommends that, further to the requirement for tax advisers to maintain PII at a level determined by HMRC, there should also be transparency rules, which would ensure that consumers have accurate and relevant information about a tax adviser when they are considering purchasing tax advice. This should help members of the public and small businesses make informed choices, improving competition in the tax advice market.

The Law Society supports HMRC’s intentions and believes that, properly implemented, a requirement for all tax advisers to carry a minimum level of cover should achieve its objectives. However, there are already large numbers of tax advisers who are members of regulated professions, including solicitors, who are already subject to minimum requirements for PII and many additional checks on their activities.

The Law Society is concerned to make sure that, if HMRC does bring in mandatory PII, the new regime will not create any additional burdens on regulated professionals whose existing obligations meet or exceed the new requirements.

See Simon’s TaxesA1.803

Source: HMRC consultation on raising standards in the tax advice market – Law Society response

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 16 June 2021 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll