Asked by: Mohammad Yasin (Labour - Bedford)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the proposed loan charge settlement scheme cut off date of 1 June 2021 for excluding taxpayers who have entered into contract settlements with HMRC before that date; and what steps she has taken to help ensure that taxpayers who settled earlier are not disadvantaged compared with those who settle under the new scheme.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The purpose of the review was to bring the matter to a close for people who have not settled and paid their loan charge liabilities. Although the loan charge officially came into force from 6 April 2019, the deadline for settling to avoid being liable to the loan charge was extended because of the Morse Review. The settlement opportunity applies after 1 June 2021 because it is from that date onwards that loan charge settlements were agreed.
The review identified affordability as a key barrier preventing those individuals from settling and made recommendations to remove this barrier. The Government accepted all but one of the review’s recommendations and will legislate to give HMRC the power to administer a new settlement scheme.
The Government has no plans to apply the recommendations of the review beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Alicia Kearns (Conservative - Rutland and Stamford)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether the Government plans to extend the improved settlement terms announced following the McCann Review to individuals who have already settled their Loan Charge liabilities with HMRC.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely. To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet been able to settle with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Alicia Kearns (Conservative - Rutland and Stamford)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many people she expects to settle their disguised remuneration liabilities as a result of the McCann Review into Loan Charge settlement terms.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely. To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet been able to settle with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Lee Dillon (Liberal Democrat - Newbury)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether she plans to offer the same settlement terms to those facing the Loan Charge as were offered to individuals who previously settled with HM Revenue and Customs.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely. To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet been able to settle with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Gareth Bacon (Conservative - Orpington)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the the value for money of the Loan Charge.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely. To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet been able to settle with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Gareth Bacon (Conservative - Orpington)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of offering the same terms to be given to those facing the Loan Charge to those who have previously settled with HMRC.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely. To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet been able to settle with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Gareth Bacon (Conservative - Orpington)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate she has made of the number of people who will settle their disguised remuneration liabilities as a result of the McCann Review into Loan Charge settlement terms.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government commissioned an independent review of the loan charge to bring the matter to a close for those affected, ensure fairness for all taxpayers and ensure that appropriate support is in place for those subject to the loan charge.
The Government accepted the review’s conclusion that the loan charge was an extraordinary piece of Government policy which necessitated an exceptional response, and is now legislating a new settlement opportunity that will assist those who have not yet settled to do so.
As a result, most individuals could see reductions of at least 50% in their outstanding loan charge liabilities, and an estimated 30% of individuals could have these liabilities written off entirely. To encourage more people to settle, the Government will write off the first £5,000 of liabilities in addition to the proposals put forward by Ray McCann.
The Government’s response to the review represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet been able to settle with HMRC. In turn, this requires those individuals to now come forward and engage with HMRC in good faith.
Tax avoidance deprives the Exchequer of funds needed to deliver vital public services and it is right that resources are targeted to stop this. There are no plans to apply the review’s recommendations beyond those individuals and employers with outstanding liabilities that were the focus of the review.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many investigations are currently open into incorrect residency claims for student finance.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
We are resolute in our commitment to protecting public money in higher education and are taking firm action to address serious concerns about exploitation of the student funding system.
Eligibility for student finance is not based solely on nationality, but on a person’s immigration status and residency. To be eligible, a student must be ordinarily resident in England and be settled or have a recognised connection with the UK. Students must also have been ordinarily resident in the UK and Islands (Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and/or the British Overseas Territories) for the three years prior to the first day of the first academic year of their course.
There are exceptions to these requirements for some individuals. For example, there is an exception to the requirement to be settled for those who are covered by the EU Withdrawal Agreement.
To qualify for support, applicants must provide the Student Loans Company (SLC) with evidence of their eligibility. This includes evidence of their identity, immigration status and ordinary residence.
SLC have robust procedures in place to check student finance eligibility, including data-sharing with Home Office and HM Passport Office. When required, the SLC will contact the Home Office to confirm an applicant’s immigration status and ordinary residence.
Nationality is an optional field when creating a student finance account, however, it is mandatory for the full application for support to be processed. Nationality will always be checked as part of verifying a person’s identity and where appropriate as part of verifying their immigration status. Applications that are incomplete for any of SLC’s identity, immigration status or residence history checks are not approved for student finance.
A student does not qualify for student finance if they have shown themselves by their conduct to be ‘unfitted’ to receive support, such as providing falsified documents. Depending on the nature of being found unfitted, the student’s details may be added to the Credit Industry Fraud Avoidance System (CIFAS) database. SLC does record details of students who have been made ineligible for student finance. However, the data is not readily available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The department does not hold the data in a format that can provide information on investigations that are currently open into incorrect residency claims for student finance.
SLC has advised the department that it has strengthened its integration with Home Office systems for the purposes of establishing eligibility for student finance.
Table 1: Number of cases of misrepresentation in student finance applications have been identified in each of the last five years.
Financial Year | Investigations (All fraud types) | Fraud type: residency | Fraud type: migrant worker |
2020/21 | 1,240 | 9 | 6 |
2021/22 | 1,737 | 10 | 78 |
2022/23 | 2,431 | 5 | 225 |
2023/24 | 2,734 | 21 | 134 |
2024/25 | 2,231 | 8 | 301 |
Table 1 shows data for undergraduate applications which have been found to warrant sanctions for false evidence on application. Applications with residency fraud have failed checks for UK nationals, Irish citizens or ‘settled status’ in the UK to verify information on the following eligibility criteria: their home is in England, they’ve been continuously living in the UK, Channel Islands or Isle of Man for three years before the first day of the first academic year (apart from temporary absences such as holidays). Applications with migrant worker fraud have failed checks or submitted false evidence to claim migrant worker status and access student finance. From 2022 onwards the number of cases linked to migrant worker students increased, initially due to a law enforcement referral and then due to collective and increased focus on fraud.
Table 2: Value and volume of income-contingent repayment loans due for repayment from Student Finance England (SFE) borrowers who were domiciled in England at the time of the loan whose income is not verified, as a proportion of the total loan book as at 10/12/2025.
Value of all loans in repayment | £226,756,961,551 |
Value of loans where income could not be verified | £12,801,872,323 |
Proportion of loan values where income was not verified | 5.65% |
Volume of all loans in repayment | 5,666,186 |
Volume of loans where income was not verified | 376,410 |
Proportion of loan volume where income was not verified | 6.64% |
Table 2 shows the value and volume of all SFE income-contingent repayment loans for students who were domiciled in England at the time of the loan whose income was not verified, as a proportion of the total loan book. The main reasons for income which is not verified is that they have been matched by HMRC but have no employment details recorded or they have moved overseas and are no longer part of the UK tax system. SLC proactively attempt to trace and contact all borrowers whose income is not verified to correctly classify the situation and take the required action.
The department does not hold the data to provide accurate loan write-off rates (the proportion of loans which have been written off) in the form requested. Due to the way in which the data is held, analysts in the department would not be able to provide this information you have requested without exceeding the disproportionate cost threshold.
Table 3 shows the number of full-time undergraduate students who were domiciled in England who received their first loan payment whilst they were under the age of 18 in each of the last ten years.
Academic Year | Number of borrowers |
2015 | 536 |
2016 | 521 |
2017 | 470 |
2018 | 460 |
2019 | 435 |
2020 | 428 |
2021 | 455 |
2022 | 484 |
2023 | 518 |
2024 | 475 |
Total | 4,782 |
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what estimate she has made of the value of student loans for which accurate income data is not currently held; and what proportion of the loan book this represents.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
We are resolute in our commitment to protecting public money in higher education and are taking firm action to address serious concerns about exploitation of the student funding system.
Eligibility for student finance is not based solely on nationality, but on a person’s immigration status and residency. To be eligible, a student must be ordinarily resident in England and be settled or have a recognised connection with the UK. Students must also have been ordinarily resident in the UK and Islands (Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and/or the British Overseas Territories) for the three years prior to the first day of the first academic year of their course.
There are exceptions to these requirements for some individuals. For example, there is an exception to the requirement to be settled for those who are covered by the EU Withdrawal Agreement.
To qualify for support, applicants must provide the Student Loans Company (SLC) with evidence of their eligibility. This includes evidence of their identity, immigration status and ordinary residence.
SLC have robust procedures in place to check student finance eligibility, including data-sharing with Home Office and HM Passport Office. When required, the SLC will contact the Home Office to confirm an applicant’s immigration status and ordinary residence.
Nationality is an optional field when creating a student finance account, however, it is mandatory for the full application for support to be processed. Nationality will always be checked as part of verifying a person’s identity and where appropriate as part of verifying their immigration status. Applications that are incomplete for any of SLC’s identity, immigration status or residence history checks are not approved for student finance.
A student does not qualify for student finance if they have shown themselves by their conduct to be ‘unfitted’ to receive support, such as providing falsified documents. Depending on the nature of being found unfitted, the student’s details may be added to the Credit Industry Fraud Avoidance System (CIFAS) database. SLC does record details of students who have been made ineligible for student finance. However, the data is not readily available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The department does not hold the data in a format that can provide information on investigations that are currently open into incorrect residency claims for student finance.
SLC has advised the department that it has strengthened its integration with Home Office systems for the purposes of establishing eligibility for student finance.
Table 1: Number of cases of misrepresentation in student finance applications have been identified in each of the last five years.
Financial Year | Investigations (All fraud types) | Fraud type: residency | Fraud type: migrant worker |
2020/21 | 1,240 | 9 | 6 |
2021/22 | 1,737 | 10 | 78 |
2022/23 | 2,431 | 5 | 225 |
2023/24 | 2,734 | 21 | 134 |
2024/25 | 2,231 | 8 | 301 |
Table 1 shows data for undergraduate applications which have been found to warrant sanctions for false evidence on application. Applications with residency fraud have failed checks for UK nationals, Irish citizens or ‘settled status’ in the UK to verify information on the following eligibility criteria: their home is in England, they’ve been continuously living in the UK, Channel Islands or Isle of Man for three years before the first day of the first academic year (apart from temporary absences such as holidays). Applications with migrant worker fraud have failed checks or submitted false evidence to claim migrant worker status and access student finance. From 2022 onwards the number of cases linked to migrant worker students increased, initially due to a law enforcement referral and then due to collective and increased focus on fraud.
Table 2: Value and volume of income-contingent repayment loans due for repayment from Student Finance England (SFE) borrowers who were domiciled in England at the time of the loan whose income is not verified, as a proportion of the total loan book as at 10/12/2025.
Value of all loans in repayment | £226,756,961,551 |
Value of loans where income could not be verified | £12,801,872,323 |
Proportion of loan values where income was not verified | 5.65% |
Volume of all loans in repayment | 5,666,186 |
Volume of loans where income was not verified | 376,410 |
Proportion of loan volume where income was not verified | 6.64% |
Table 2 shows the value and volume of all SFE income-contingent repayment loans for students who were domiciled in England at the time of the loan whose income was not verified, as a proportion of the total loan book. The main reasons for income which is not verified is that they have been matched by HMRC but have no employment details recorded or they have moved overseas and are no longer part of the UK tax system. SLC proactively attempt to trace and contact all borrowers whose income is not verified to correctly classify the situation and take the required action.
The department does not hold the data to provide accurate loan write-off rates (the proportion of loans which have been written off) in the form requested. Due to the way in which the data is held, analysts in the department would not be able to provide this information you have requested without exceeding the disproportionate cost threshold.
Table 3 shows the number of full-time undergraduate students who were domiciled in England who received their first loan payment whilst they were under the age of 18 in each of the last ten years.
Academic Year | Number of borrowers |
2015 | 536 |
2016 | 521 |
2017 | 470 |
2018 | 460 |
2019 | 435 |
2020 | 428 |
2021 | 455 |
2022 | 484 |
2023 | 518 |
2024 | 475 |
Total | 4,782 |
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many students agreed to receive a student loan whilst they were under the age of 18 in each of the last 10 years.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
We are resolute in our commitment to protecting public money in higher education and are taking firm action to address serious concerns about exploitation of the student funding system.
Eligibility for student finance is not based solely on nationality, but on a person’s immigration status and residency. To be eligible, a student must be ordinarily resident in England and be settled or have a recognised connection with the UK. Students must also have been ordinarily resident in the UK and Islands (Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and/or the British Overseas Territories) for the three years prior to the first day of the first academic year of their course.
There are exceptions to these requirements for some individuals. For example, there is an exception to the requirement to be settled for those who are covered by the EU Withdrawal Agreement.
To qualify for support, applicants must provide the Student Loans Company (SLC) with evidence of their eligibility. This includes evidence of their identity, immigration status and ordinary residence.
SLC have robust procedures in place to check student finance eligibility, including data-sharing with Home Office and HM Passport Office. When required, the SLC will contact the Home Office to confirm an applicant’s immigration status and ordinary residence.
Nationality is an optional field when creating a student finance account, however, it is mandatory for the full application for support to be processed. Nationality will always be checked as part of verifying a person’s identity and where appropriate as part of verifying their immigration status. Applications that are incomplete for any of SLC’s identity, immigration status or residence history checks are not approved for student finance.
A student does not qualify for student finance if they have shown themselves by their conduct to be ‘unfitted’ to receive support, such as providing falsified documents. Depending on the nature of being found unfitted, the student’s details may be added to the Credit Industry Fraud Avoidance System (CIFAS) database. SLC does record details of students who have been made ineligible for student finance. However, the data is not readily available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The department does not hold the data in a format that can provide information on investigations that are currently open into incorrect residency claims for student finance.
SLC has advised the department that it has strengthened its integration with Home Office systems for the purposes of establishing eligibility for student finance.
Table 1: Number of cases of misrepresentation in student finance applications have been identified in each of the last five years.
Financial Year | Investigations (All fraud types) | Fraud type: residency | Fraud type: migrant worker |
2020/21 | 1,240 | 9 | 6 |
2021/22 | 1,737 | 10 | 78 |
2022/23 | 2,431 | 5 | 225 |
2023/24 | 2,734 | 21 | 134 |
2024/25 | 2,231 | 8 | 301 |
Table 1 shows data for undergraduate applications which have been found to warrant sanctions for false evidence on application. Applications with residency fraud have failed checks for UK nationals, Irish citizens or ‘settled status’ in the UK to verify information on the following eligibility criteria: their home is in England, they’ve been continuously living in the UK, Channel Islands or Isle of Man for three years before the first day of the first academic year (apart from temporary absences such as holidays). Applications with migrant worker fraud have failed checks or submitted false evidence to claim migrant worker status and access student finance. From 2022 onwards the number of cases linked to migrant worker students increased, initially due to a law enforcement referral and then due to collective and increased focus on fraud.
Table 2: Value and volume of income-contingent repayment loans due for repayment from Student Finance England (SFE) borrowers who were domiciled in England at the time of the loan whose income is not verified, as a proportion of the total loan book as at 10/12/2025.
Value of all loans in repayment | £226,756,961,551 |
Value of loans where income could not be verified | £12,801,872,323 |
Proportion of loan values where income was not verified | 5.65% |
Volume of all loans in repayment | 5,666,186 |
Volume of loans where income was not verified | 376,410 |
Proportion of loan volume where income was not verified | 6.64% |
Table 2 shows the value and volume of all SFE income-contingent repayment loans for students who were domiciled in England at the time of the loan whose income was not verified, as a proportion of the total loan book. The main reasons for income which is not verified is that they have been matched by HMRC but have no employment details recorded or they have moved overseas and are no longer part of the UK tax system. SLC proactively attempt to trace and contact all borrowers whose income is not verified to correctly classify the situation and take the required action.
The department does not hold the data to provide accurate loan write-off rates (the proportion of loans which have been written off) in the form requested. Due to the way in which the data is held, analysts in the department would not be able to provide this information you have requested without exceeding the disproportionate cost threshold.
Table 3 shows the number of full-time undergraduate students who were domiciled in England who received their first loan payment whilst they were under the age of 18 in each of the last ten years.
Academic Year | Number of borrowers |
2015 | 536 |
2016 | 521 |
2017 | 470 |
2018 | 460 |
2019 | 435 |
2020 | 428 |
2021 | 455 |
2022 | 484 |
2023 | 518 |
2024 | 475 |
Total | 4,782 |