Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many incidents of tax fraud involving (a) the VAT484 form and (b) other paper forms HMRC has recorded in each of last five financial years; and what the (i) total and (ii) average value of those incidents is.
Answered by Nigel Huddleston
HMRC regularly encounters attempts to fraudulently attack its systems and does not routinely keep records of the value of individual instances unless a pattern emerges.
Towards the end of February, HMRC identified a small number of cases which constituted more than isolated incidents. In these cases, paper VAT 484 forms had been wrongly used in an attempt to fraudulently gain access to VAT repayments. Immediate steps have been taken to prevent this from happening, and the situation is being monitored to see if further action is necessary.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on what date (a) he and (b) HMRC first became aware of fraud involving the VAT484 form; and what steps he is taking to tackle such fraud.
Answered by Nigel Huddleston
HMRC regularly encounters attempts to fraudulently attack its systems and does not routinely keep records of the value of individual instances unless a pattern emerges.
Towards the end of February, HMRC identified a small number of cases which constituted more than isolated incidents. In these cases, paper VAT 484 forms had been wrongly used in an attempt to fraudulently gain access to VAT repayments. Immediate steps have been taken to prevent this from happening, and the situation is being monitored to see if further action is necessary.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, when he plans to answer Question 21855, tabled by the hon. Member for Ealing North on 15 April 2024.
Answered by Robbie Moore - Shadow Minister (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The answer to Question 21855 was published on 2 May 2024. I apologise for the delay in responding to the hon. Member.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 2 April 2024 to Question 19486 on Sewage: Repairs and Maintenance, if he will issue guidance to (a) local authorities and (b) water companies on whether they have a statutory duty to enforce sewage misconnections under Section 59 of the Building Act 1984.
Answered by Robbie Moore - Shadow Minister (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
There is no statutory duty for water companies under Section 59 of the Building Act 1984. The legislation explains the responsibilities of local authorities and the powers available to them, as well as the options for recovering costs they might incur if they have to undertake remedial action.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the value was of (a) Class 1 employee, (b) Class 1 employer, (c) Class 2 and (d) Class 4 self-employed National Insurance Contributions receipts in the 2023-24 financial year.
Answered by Nigel Huddleston
The Office for Budget Responsibility publishes forecast levels of National Insurance receipts in their Economic and Fiscal Outlook report.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to the Answer of 11 December 2023 to Question 5143 on Baby Care Units: Parental Leave, what her planned timetable is for bringing forward the remaining statutory instruments under the Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act 2023.
Answered by Kevin Hollinrake - Shadow Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities
We are committed to introducing Neonatal Care Leave and Pay as quickly as possible and work is ongoing across Government to deliver these new entitlements by April 2025, subject to parliamentary scheduling.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if he will issue guidance to (a) local authorities and (b) water companies on their obligations to enforce sewage misconnection rectifications where the property owner does not rectify the faults as requested.
Answered by Robbie Moore - Shadow Minister (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Under Section 59 of the Building Act 1984, local authorities can require property owners to rectify unsatisfactory drainage. If a property owner fails to act, the local authority can carry out the works itself and then recover its costs. The Secretary of State and his officials regularly meet with water companies to discuss their obligations, including around drainage performance.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to page 37 of his Department's publication entitled, Spring Budget 2024: Policy Costings, published in March 2024, if he will publish the figures used by his Department for the size of the tax base in calculating those costings.
Answered by Nigel Huddleston
The policy costing was based on data reflecting business rates receipts and reliefs as reported by local authorities in the National Non-Domestic Rates forms, which are publicly available on the gov.uk website.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to question 1 of his Department's consultation on business rates avoidance and evasion, published in July 2023, and to page 37 of his Department's publication entitled, Spring Budget 2024: Policy Costings, published in March 2024, whether his Department made an assessment of the potential merits of extending the reset period for empty property relief to six months.
Answered by Nigel Huddleston
Responses to the Business Rates Avoidance and Evasion consultation made clear that avoidance of business rates through abuse of Empty Property Relief (EPR) is an area we need to take action on. Most respondents, and all those from local government, agreed that extending the EPR ‘reset period’ is an effective means of reducing rates avoidance. Extending the reset period to 13 weeks will help ensure a level playing field between ratepayers while maintaining support for landlords while they seek new tenants for vacant properties.
Asked by: James Murray (Labour (Co-op) - Ealing North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to question 1 of his Department's consultation on business rates avoidance and evasion, published in July 2023, and to page 37 of his Department's publication entitled, Spring Budget 2024: Policy Costings, published in March 2024, whether his Department made an estimate of the Exchequer impact of extending the reset period for empty property relief to six months.
Answered by Nigel Huddleston
Responses to the Business Rates Avoidance and Evasion consultation made clear that avoidance of business rates through abuse of Empty Property Relief (EPR) is an area we need to take action on. Most respondents, and all those from local government, agreed that extending the EPR ‘reset period’ is an effective means of reducing rates avoidance. Extending the reset period to 13 weeks will help ensure a level playing field between ratepayers while maintaining support for landlords while they seek new tenants for vacant properties.