Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how they will ensure that UK patents granted via the European Patent Office are subject to the same conditions, and confer the same rights, as national patents granted via the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO); and what assessment they have made as to whether the IPO could grant a separate but equivalent right which provides the same benefits as a national UK patent but provides a grace period which is fully compatible with the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific (CPTPP).
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership sets clear and consistent rules in the intellectual property sector which will be of benefit to both UK businesses and consumers. It would be inappropriate to comment on the specific matters raised as negotiations on the terms of the UK’s accession are ongoing.
The UK possesses a world leading intellectual property regime, and it will not sign trade deals that compromise it. Our membership of the European Patent Convention (EPC) is an important part of that regime, by providing an efficient mechanism for innovative UK businesses to protect their inventions across 38 states. The UK takes its international obligations seriously and our accession negotiations will be consistent with our national interest and wider Government priorities, which include our continued alignment with the European Patent Convention and other international IP treaties.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific (CPTPP) membership is compatible with the UK’s continued membership of the Convention on the Grant of European Patents; and whether they have requested exclusions from Article 18.38 CPTPP (patent grace period) or Article 18.46 CPTPP (patent term adjustment).
Answered by Lord Grimstone of Boscobel
The UK has a world leading intellectual property regime and will not sign trade deals that compromise it. The Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership sets clear and consistent rules for the intellectual property (IP) sector which will benefit UK businesses and consumers. Article 18.46 (patent term adjustment) is a suspended provision so the UK does not have to sign up to it.
The UK takes its international obligations seriously and our accession negotiations will be consistent with our national interest and wider Government priorities, which include our continued alignment with the European Patent Convention and other international IP treaties.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, if any, of the cost to business of applying VAT on imports from EU states.
Answered by Viscount Younger of Leckie - Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)
Before the UK left the EU, sales of goods from the EU to UK customers were already subject to VAT. This has not changed. Prior to the end of the transition period, VAT was collected and paid through the VAT return system. For sales to consumers or non-VAT-registered businesses, VAT was either due in the EU Member State or in the UK, depending on whether the volume of the supplier’s sales made into the UK breached an annual threshold. For sales to VAT-registered businesses, the VAT registered-business would be responsible for accounting for the VAT on a VAT return through what is known as a ‘reverse charge’. The VAT-registered business could reclaim this VAT as input tax on the same VAT return, subject to the normal recovery rules. Only sales to the UK from outside the EU were subject to import VAT collection at the border.
Now that the transition period has ended, the UK has used its freedom from EU rules to create a fairer and more robust tax system, while also complying with World Trade Organisation rules by treating EU and non-EU goods the same. For goods in consignments up to £135, VAT is due at the point of sale. Where a UK VAT-registered business provides its VAT registration number to the supplier, the VAT registered business is responsible for accounting for the VAT due on the goods through a reverse charge. For goods in consignments over £135, import VAT is due and UK VAT-registered businesses can choose to use ‘postponed VAT accounting’. Accounting for VAT on a VAT return in these ways allows businesses to reclaim it as input tax on the same VAT return, as was the case under the previous rules, and ensures continuity for businesses.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have had, if any, with the UK insurance sector regarding the impact of timing differences arising from Pillar 2 of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development BEPS Framework.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
OECD discussions on addressing the tax challenges of digitalisation have been ongoing for a number of years, with the detailed frameworks for Pillars One and Two having been under development since 2019.
Over the course of that time the OECD has conducted multiple public consultations on the proposals and had extensive engagement with businesses across sectors to take their views on board.
UK government officials are also engaged with many sectors regarding the potential impact of both pillars, including with the insurance sector on the specific issue of timing differences under Pillar 2.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's proposal for a global minimum corporation tax on the ability of the UK Government to adjust its domestic taxation policy.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
It is a UK priority to reach a comprehensive two-pillar solution addressing the tax challenges of digitisation.
The details of a final agreement, including on the exact framework for implementation, are still subject to international negotiation.
If a political agreement is reached and both pillars are implemented in the UK, they will be subject to the normal tax policymaking process. That would include legislation in the relevant Finance Bill, with impacts then being formally assessed and set out in a Tax Information and Impact Note upon the introduction of the legislation.
Any significant subsequent changes to that legislation would likewise be made through a future Finance Bill.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether parliamentary approval will be required for a future increase in the world minimum rate of corporation tax under Pillar 2 of the framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
It is a UK priority to reach a comprehensive two-pillar solution addressing the tax challenges of digitisation.
The details of a final agreement, including on the exact framework for implementation, are still subject to international negotiation.
If a political agreement is reached and both pillars are implemented in the UK, they will be subject to the normal tax policymaking process. That would include legislation in the relevant Finance Bill, with impacts then being formally assessed and set out in a Tax Information and Impact Note upon the introduction of the legislation.
Any significant subsequent changes to that legislation would likewise be made through a future Finance Bill.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the cost of applying the EU’s REACH Regulation (1907/2006); and what assessment they made, if any, of that cost compared to the risk-based regime that predated REACH.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
In 2006, Defra produced a Partial Impact Assessment ahead of the implementation of EU REACH [please see attached]. It forecasts the cost to UK industry of implementing EU REACH to be £404m. The costs associated with supporting HSE in its role as the UK competent authority under EU REACH since it came into force are estimated at around £15m. A comparative assessment of these costs and the regime that predated EU REACH, is not available.
In 2018, the European Commission published an evaluation of EU REACH. It found that costs to industry for the first two registration deadlines amounted to €2.3- 2.6 billion. Dossier evaluation costs were estimated at €200 million. Restriction costs were estimated at €170 million per year.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the cost of applying the EU’s Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC).
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
In 2014, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills conducted a review of the impact on the UK labour market of the UK Working Time Regulations. These Working Time Regulations implemented the EU Working Time Directive into UK law. The report is attached, but can also be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-time-regulations-impact-on-uk-labour-market