Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury

Oral Answers to Questions

Paul Sweeney Excerpts
Tuesday 21st May 2019

(5 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mel Stride Portrait Mel Stride
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have already dealt with the issue of retrospection. As to why tax may not have been paid at the time that it was due, there are a multitude of reasons for that not least of which is the fact that many taxpayers simply do not volunteer the correct information or they claim that their scheme works when clearly it does not. HMRC has, over many, many years, pursued these various schemes through the courts, including the Supreme Court, and on each occasion, these schemes have been found not to work.

Paul Sweeney Portrait Mr Paul Sweeney (Glasgow North East) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

22. The Treasury has claimed that the off-payroll tax should not affect the genuine self-employed, yet HMRC’s Check Employment Status for Tax tool assessed 3,909 contractors across five key public sector bodies and the results were that 94% of the contractors were deemed to be employers. That clearly demonstrates that the CEST tool is leading to the wrong decisions. Will the Minister now agree to cease the use of the CEST tool and to put on hold those plans to roll it out to the private sector?

Mel Stride Portrait Mel Stride
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The statement that the hon. Gentleman has made does not suggest that the CEST tool is inappropriate. The CEST tool is there to determine an individual’s employment status. In 85% of cases, it does give a determination. HMRC will stand by that determination provided the right data was put into the CEST process.