To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation: Correspondence
Tuesday 18th October 2022

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many warning letters have been issued by the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation in response to Suspicious Activity Reports of potential sanctions breaches in (a) each financial and (b) calendar years in the last three years including 2022.

Answered by Andrew Griffith - Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)

When individuals or firms report frozen funds or dealing with a designated person to HM Treasury’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), OFSI takes appropriate action depending on the report. Where there may be financial sanctions compliance concerns it investigates accordingly. OFSI’s responses range from no further action, where no breach is found, to monetary penalties where a breach is sufficiently serious.

OFSI may issue a warning letter in a wide range of circumstances, including following enforcement investigations in response to a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR). However, OFSI does not break down referral data for enforcement cases which originate from SARs.


Written Question
Companies: Income
Tuesday 15th March 2022

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many companies registered for VAT have an annual turnover (a) between (i) £85,000 and £125,000, (ii) £126,000 and £250,000, (iii) £251,000 and £500,000, (iv) £500,000 and £750,000, (v) £751,000 and £1,000,000 and (vi) £1 million and £5 million and (b) over £5 million in each the last five years.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

The active VAT population by turnover band is published in Table 5a of the Value Added Tax (VAT) annual statistics: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/value-added-tax-vat-annual-statistics

Revenue received by HMRC by turnover band is not available. Liabilities by turnover band are published in the same publication in Table 5b.


Written Question
Companies: Income
Tuesday 15th March 2022

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much revenue from VAT his Department has received from companies with an annual turnover (a) between (i) £85,000 and £125,000, (ii) £126,000 and £250,000, (iii) £251,000 and £500,000, (iv) £500,000 and £750,000, (v) £751,000 and £1,000,000 and (vi) £1 million and £5 million and (b) turnover over £5 million in each of the last five years.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

The active VAT population by turnover band is published in Table 5a of the Value Added Tax (VAT) annual statistics: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/value-added-tax-vat-annual-statistics

Revenue received by HMRC by turnover band is not available. Liabilities by turnover band are published in the same publication in Table 5b.


Written Question
Mortgages: Regulation
Monday 31st January 2022

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 20 January 2022 to Question 103605 on Financial Services Authority, on what specific information and reports the decision not take forward the legislation referred to in that Question was based.

Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

The Government decided that it would not take forward legislation but would keep the position of contracts sold to unregulated firms under review and return to legislation if there was sufficient evidence of consumer detriment. This decision was reached based on careful consideration of the market conditions at the time, analysis of the available evidence of consumer harm and engagement with a range of stakeholders, including the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).

The Government continues to keep the position of mortgage contracts sold to unregulated firms under review. All mortgages, regardless of the regulatory status of the owner, must be administered by a regulated administrator.

It is worth reiterating that further regulation of this kind would not necessarily enable borrowers to switch to a cheaper mortgage deal or lower the interest rates they pay.


Written Question
Wines: Excise Duties
Friday 21st January 2022

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has made an assessment of the effect of the review of excise duties on wine and subsequent price impacts on small businesses and independent wine sellers of higher strength and higher value wines.

Answered by Helen Whately - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Government believes the reforms announced at the Budget will produce an alcohol duty system that is overall simpler, fairer and healthier.

The reforms announced at Autumn Budget 2021 mean higher strength still wines will pay more duty, while lighter wines (below 11.5% alcohol by volume – ABV) will become cheaper.

The Government also announced that the 28% higher duty rate on sparkling wine will be abolished, so that sparkling wines will pay considerably less duty in future. From 2023 sparkling and still wines of the same strength will pay the same duty.

The Government is continuing to engage with industry – including small businesses – for further information about the effect of the changes on them. Industry members are encouraged to respond to the alcohol review consultation before the deadline of 30 January 2022.


Written Question
Financial Services Authority
Thursday 20th January 2022

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what (a) correspondence and (b) other information his Department holds on the basis on which the Economic Secretary to the Treasury decided not to take forward the Financial Services Authority regulation of administering a regulated contract on 2 January 2013.

Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

In January 2011, the Government announced its intention to introduce further regulation in relation to the sale of regulated mortgage contracts to unregulated firms. Following a review, the Government decided that it would not take forward legislation but would instead keep the position of contracts sold to unregulated firms under review and return to legislation if there was sufficient evidence of consumer detriment.

The Government remains open to further regulation but is yet to see evidence that any consumer harm has occurred under the current regulatory regime that would have been prevented by the proposed regulation. Under the current regulatory regime, firms administering regulated mortgages, including third-party administrators, must be regulated. This means that they are subject to relevant provisions of the Financial Conduct Authority’s Mortgage Conduct of Business requirements, including provisions regarding the fair treatment of customers in arrears. It is also worth noting that further regulation of this kind would not necessarily enable borrowers to switch to a cheaper mortgage deal or to materially lower the interest rates they pay.


Written Question
Mortgages: Tax Allowances
Tuesday 7th December 2021

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his Answer of 2 November 2021 to Question 64692, on Mortgages: Tax Allowances, for what reason his Department's estimate of the number of landlords affected by the decision to restrict tax relief on mortgage interest to the basic rate of income tax has changed from one in five to one in 10.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

The original estimate that 1 in 5 landlords would be affected by the decision to restrict finance cost relief to the basic rate of tax was a forecast based on limited information. The latest estimate of 1 in 10 is based upon received self-assessment tax returns for the tax year 2017-18, the first year after the restriction was brought into force. The statistic refers to individual UK landlords of residential property who completed the main self-assessment property return. It does not include corporate landlords, members of partnerships with property income, landlords of property abroad, landlords who completed the SA200 short self-assessment return, or owners of Furnished Holiday Lettings.

For tax year 2017-18, of all individuals that had declared property income via their self-assessment tax return, around 11 per cent, or approximately 1 in 10, paid more income tax as a result of the decision to restrict tax relief on mortgage interest to the basic rate of income tax.


Written Question
Mortgages: Tax Allowances
Tuesday 7th December 2021

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his Answer of 2 November 2021 to Question 64692, on Mortgages: Tax Allowances, on what basis his Department has concluded that one in 10 landlords are affected by the decision to restrict tax relief on mortgage interest to the basic rate of income tax.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

The original estimate that 1 in 5 landlords would be affected by the decision to restrict finance cost relief to the basic rate of tax was a forecast based on limited information. The latest estimate of 1 in 10 is based upon received self-assessment tax returns for the tax year 2017-18, the first year after the restriction was brought into force. The statistic refers to individual UK landlords of residential property who completed the main self-assessment property return. It does not include corporate landlords, members of partnerships with property income, landlords of property abroad, landlords who completed the SA200 short self-assessment return, or owners of Furnished Holiday Lettings.

For tax year 2017-18, of all individuals that had declared property income via their self-assessment tax return, around 11 per cent, or approximately 1 in 10, paid more income tax as a result of the decision to restrict tax relief on mortgage interest to the basic rate of income tax.


Written Question
Private Rented Housing: Taxation
Tuesday 7th December 2021

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment the Treasury has made of the potential impact of taxation on the supply of homes for private rent.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

The Government believes good quality private rental accommodation is important and is committed to reforming the Private Rented Sector. The Government plans to publish a White Paper in 2022 which will set out a balanced package of reforms that works for both tenants and landlords.

In April 2016, the Government introduced higher rates of Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) for those purchasing additional properties as a second home or as a buy to let property. The higher rates are three percentage points above the standard SDLT rates and are part of the Government’s commitment to support first time buyers and ensure an efficient use of housing.


Written Question
Revenue and Customs
Friday 19th November 2021

Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the (a) annual budget and (b) number of staff was for HMRC's Proceeds of Crime Unit in each of the last five years.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

HMRC is determined that tax fraud should not pay. Since the launch of our Fraud Investigation Service in 2015-16, we have secured and protected nearly £30 billion for our vital public services and secured more than 3,800 criminal convictions. In addition, HMRC’s Spending Review settlement includes £100 million for more resources for HMRC to tackle all forms of non-compliance, including avoidance and evasion, and continued funding of over £70 million for the Taxpayer Protection Taskforce to combat fraud and abuse of the Covid-19 schemes.

The tables below detail the full-time equivalent staffing levels in both Fraud Investigation Service (1) and the Proceeds of Crime unit (2).

1. HMRC's Fraud Investigation Service

2017-18

2018-19

2019-20

2020-21

2021-22 *

a) Annual Budget (approx.)- includes Pay-bill, Other Resource Costs, Income & Capital.

£240m

£260m

£300m

£300m

£300m

b) Full-time equivalent staff at the end of the year (approx.)

4,100

4,400

4,900

4,400

4,900

*2021-22 staff number is a year-end projection

2. HMRC's Proceeds of Crime Unit (HMRC’s Fraud Investigation Service hosts this function)

a) The annual budget for this function has not been provided as it forms a part of the wider budget allocation for the Fraud Investigation Service.

2017-18

2018-19

2019-20

2020-21

2021-22 *

b) Full-time equivalent staff at the end of the year (approx.)

400

350

400

350

400

*2021-22 staff number is a year-end projection