Open consultation

The Tax Administration Framework Review - new ways to tackle non-compliance

Published 30 October 2024

Summary

Subject of this consultation

This consultation forms part of the government’s commitment to modernising and reforming the tax administration system. The consultation invites views on potential reforms to HMRC’s powers (that is, the laws that govern how it acts) designed to make it easier and quicker for taxpayers to put things right, while helping HMRC collect the right tax more effectively and efficiently.

Scope of this consultation

This consultation is about exploring whether HMRC’s approach to correcting mistakes by large numbers of taxpayers could be improved. It focuses on the proportionality and efficiency of HMRC’s current correction powers and seeks views on their potential modernisation and reform, as well as the potential for a new power which would require taxpayers to self correct their return.

Who should read this

The government welcomes engagement from any individual or organisation with views on how HMRC tackles non-compliance and how this could be made more efficient, effective, and simpler by helping more taxpayers become aware of and correct simple mistakes before they become a larger problem.

The consultation is likely to be of particular interest to individuals, companies, and those acting on their behalf. Taxpayer representative bodies, charities, and other voluntary organisations that help people with clients’ tax affairs will also have an interest.

Duration

The consultation will run for 12 weeks from 30 October 2024 to 22 January 2025.

Lead officials

The lead officials for the consultation are Vanessa Solan and Gillian Sells of HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

How to respond or enquire about this consultation

Any responses or queries about this consultation should be sent to [email protected].

Respondents should not feel that they have to respond to all the questions in this document. HMRC also welcomes partial responses, focused on the individual aspects that are most relevant to the respondent.

Additional ways to be involved

HMRC welcomes collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders and will organise stakeholder discussions to support contributions from across the range of taxpayers and intermediaries. Please contact HMRC using the email address above if you would like to be involved.

After the consultation

Responses to this consultation will inform decisions on whether policy proposals to reform the tax administration framework are taken forward. Any proposals could be subject to further consultation in accordance with the tax policy-making process.

Getting to this stage

In February 2024, the government published a call for evidence The Tax Administration Framework Review: enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards. This covered a range of reform opportunities within tax administration relating to HMRC’s enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, and safeguards.

As part of exploring the reform of enquiry and assessment powers, the call for evidence invited views on how HMRC might approach reform of powers relating to reliefs and credits.

Respondents offered a variety of views and suggestions in respect of this challenge, which included:

• recognising the need for HMRC to be able to effectively identify and tackle those who sought to bend or break the rules
• suggestions that better use and targeting of existing HMRC resources could go some way towards supporting this objective, without the need for new powers
• an emphasis on the importance of certainty and finality for the taxpayer when dealing with HMRC

There was support for the idea taxpayers should provide a reason when rejecting a revenue correction notice, though some believed HMRC should also be obliged to explain why a notice had been given, helping assist the taxpayer and potentially reducing the number of rejections.

A full summary of responses is published on GOV.UK.

The government has welcomed the feedback and announced its intention to consult further as part of the next steps. This consultation explores options for both; reform of existing enquiry and assessment powers; and a possible new power. These have the potential to modernise and reform HMRC’s approach, not simply in regard to credits and reliefs, but to how it responds more broadly and effectively to the increasing issue of large numbers of taxpayers making similar, relatively small mistakes.

Previous engagement

HMRC has held preliminary discussions with several tax professional bodies and taxpayer representative groups as part of the call for evidence referenced above. HMRC continues to build an evidence base through further discussions with external stakeholders and other tax authorities.

1. Introduction

HMRC’s aim is for everyone to pay the tax that is legally due, to support them to get their taxes right, and to ensure everyone plays by the same rules.

Over recent years, HMRC has observed a significant increase in taxpayers making inaccurate claims for relief or having inaccuracies in their tax returns. Collectively, these amounts add up, costing significant amounts of public money needed to pay for the schools, hospitals, and other essential services we all rely on.

This poses a challenge for HMRC about how to respond proportionately and effectively. Many of HMRC’s powers are designed to address inaccuracies through one-to-one engagement with individual taxpayers. These processes can be time consuming, may feel disproportionate to the inaccuracy in question and are not well suited to addressing issues that affect lots of taxpayers at the same time.

HMRC wants to make paying the right amount of tax as simple as possible, while taking the necessary action to protect society from harm and ensure a level playing field for individuals and businesses. The government believes there could be opportunities to modernise and reform the tax administration framework to improve the ease, cost and effectiveness of identifying and correcting this type of non-compliance, offering potential benefits to taxpayers, agents and HMRC.

This consultation explores those opportunities.

The need for change

The number of taxpayers is rising, as is the complexity of their tax affairs. The self-assessment population has grown over the last 10 years by 25%, from 9.2 million to 11.5 million.

The majority of customers pay their tax in full and on time. Despite this, a large amount of the tax due still goes unpaid: this is known as the tax gap. While there are individual cases where large amounts of tax are at risk, a large proportion of the tax gap is attributed to individuals and small businesses, with smaller amounts of tax due from a very large number of taxpayers. HMRC estimates around 30% of those in income tax self assessment, and 40% of small companies, have some form of inaccuracy in their tax return.

Inaccurate claims for relief present a particular challenge. Along with the increase in taxpayers, the total value of repayments reported by HMRC has increased significantly, increasing by nearly 20% in 2 years to £148.8 billion in the tax year 2023 to 2024. Digitisation, and the ability to submit a claim quickly and more easily than before, has led to increasingly high volumes of relatively low value inaccurate repayment claims. HMRC has also seen an increase in situations where taxpayers have felt misled when using companies that claim to specialise in claiming tax refunds from HMRC.

HMRC’s existing powers and approaches

HMRC has a range of existing powers, procedural rules and approaches it can use to promote better compliance and respond to correct non-compliance. The circumstances that determine which interventions are used will vary according to the risk. Examples of these include:

• HMRC prompts – digital and non-digital communications and education aimed at positively influencing taxpayer behaviour before a return is submitted
• Customer amendments – taxpayers can correct their own return within a set time scale if they become aware of an error
• ‘One to Many’ campaigns – HMRC can use these where it identifies certain types of risks that can be managed in a common way, contacting multiple taxpayers to highlight the risk or potential error in their return and asking them to correct it
• Revenue correction powers – HMRC can correct a taxpayer’s tax return where it has reason to believe the return is incorrect in light of the information available (such as correcting arithmetical errors), without the need to open an enquiry into the return
• Enquiry powers – once a taxpayer has submitted or amended a direct tax return, HMRC can in most circumstances open an enquiry into the return. Enquiries can also be opened into certain claims made outside of returns
• Assessment powers – if the enquiry window is missed then, subject to certain conditions and time limits, a discovery assessment can be raised
• Information and inspection powers – for example, under Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008, HMRC can request information from a taxpayer (or third party, such as the taxpayer’s bank or building society) in order to check their tax position, subject to certain restrictions

In recent years, HMRC has introduced a broad range of controls and processes to prevent inaccurate claims for tax relief and promote better compliance, including:

• changes to policies and processes. For example, a new evidence requirement for Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) tax relief claims introduced in December 2023
• applying automated and manual credibility checks to claims submitted pre-payment;
  increases in agent control processes
• helping to prevent taxpayers being misled by bad actors by working in partnership with the Advertising Standards Authority

Further opportunities for improvement

This consultation explores whether HMRC’s approach to correcting taxpayer inaccuracies could be improved. It considers two areas for potential improvements: changes to HMRC’s existing powers and processes, and a new power to require taxpayers to correct mistakes themselves. The details are explored in the following two chapters.

The government is particularly interested in stakeholder views on whether one single option or a combination of options offer the best opportunity to address and respond to the problem and deliver improvements.

2. Reform of existing powers

This chapter considers the potential for changes to existing powers and explores whether these could improve HMRC’s and taxpayers’ approaches to correcting error and inaccuracy.

Amendment to conditions for making claims

Once a return is submitted, HMRC typically risk assesses and then processes repayment claims before it conducts more thorough checks on validity, supported by enquiry and information powers.

This approach allows HMRC to strike a balance between promptly making payments to taxpayers, while also being able to identify errors in claims and tackle those who bend or break the rules. When claims are received in high volumes, it is not always possible for HMRC to check for validity quickly, which can mean certainty is not always given as quickly as both HMRC and customers would like.

The government has already implemented changes to some tax reliefs, which include greater upfront information requirements from the taxpayer. An example of this is in Research and Development tax reliefs which has introduced a requirement for additional information, which details a breakdown of the types of expenditure.

Additional checks and more upfront information helps HMRC make better judgements when claims are received and therefore payments are able to be processed and paid more promptly with certainty. Extending a similar provision to other claims and reliefs could give HMRC a stronger basis from which to risk-assess those claims and reliefs. It could help HMRC identify inaccurate claims more efficiently and accept those which are legitimate. It could also minimise the need for a lengthier enquiry, to establish details that could have been provided by the taxpayer at an earlier stage. Where this could be avoided, entitlements could be paid sooner.

This would need to be balanced against additional time and cost burdens imposed on taxpayers, who would need to routinely provide more information when first submitting a claim.

Question 1: What are your views on introducing additional information requirements to other claims for tax reliefs and allowances?

Question 2: Are there cases where this approach would be particularly helpful for customers?

Question 3: How could any additional administrative costs be kept to a minimum?

Reform of Revenue Correction Notice (RCN) conditions

Revenue correction powers allow HMRC to correct a taxpayer’s direct tax return where it has reason to believe the return is incorrect. It does this by issuing a revenue correction notice within 9 months of the return being received, which a taxpayer can reject. These powers do not apply to indirect taxes.

There are differences across regimes which include:

• the conditions: HMRC can amend or correct an Income Tax Self-Assessment (ITSA) or Corporation Tax Self-Assessment (CTSA) return where there is an obvious error (such as an arithmetical error) or anything else where there is reason to believe the return is incorrect. The provisions for Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT), however, only allow HMRC to make corrections where there appears to be an obvious error or omission

• how to reject: A taxpayer can reject a correction of an ITSA return by notice in writing, within 30 days of the issue of the notice. A company can reject a correction of its CTSA return by amending its return, provided it is in time to do so. If a company is out of time to amend its return, the correction can be rejected by letter within 3 months of the date of the RCN. The rules for SDLT are similar to CTSA. When a correction is rejected, the return reverts back to its original position. No reason for the rejection needs to be given.

There are opportunities to simplify the process by aligning the conditions and applying one method of rejection across all relevant regimes. This would allow the taxpayer to communicate in a consistent way (such as by digital channels) and could make it simpler for taxpayers to understand their rights and take appropriate action.

Question 4: What are your views on aligning the conditions for when HMRC can make corrections, so that they are the same across relevant regimes?

Question 5: What are your views on aligning the ways that revenue correction notices can be rejected, so that they are the same across relevant regimes?

Additionally, if no detail for the rejection has been provided, HMRC will not know why the taxpayer disagrees with the correction. HMRC could question the rejection informally but there is no requirement for the taxpayer to respond, meaning the most appropriate options would be to accept the rejection or open an enquiry, which might be a disproportionate intervention compared to the tax at stake.

Introducing a requirement for HMRC to explain why it is making a correction and for taxpayers to provide evidence to support their rejection could avoid the need for a full enquiry, providing a quicker resolution for taxpayers and HMRC and providing certainty at an earlier stage. This additional context could support a better dialogue between HMRC and the taxpayer, prompting a more collaborative approach and ensuring clear facts are established at an earlier stage.

Providing clarity on the kinds of information or evidence required would support customers in making the correction and provide reassurance to them that the process is not excessively burdensome.

Question 6: What are your views on introducing a mandatory requirement for taxpayers to provide evidence to support a rejection of a revenue correction notice?

Question 7: Do you think this requirement should extend to HMRC explaining why a correction was made and what evidence is required?

Question 8: What other ways could the revenue correction process be improved?

Introduction of a partial enquiry

Enquiries allow open and transparent conversations to take place, but the nature and extent of enquiries will vary considerably. They rely heavily on HMRC intervention, can be time-consuming for all parties and can be costly for the taxpayer, particularly if representation is required.

The formal steps HMRC must take to open and close an enquiry are the same whether the mistake is complex or straightforward and similar processes and resources are required even if the inaccuracy is low in value. This means enquiries can sometimes take longer than both HMRC and taxpayers would like and the costs for the taxpayer and HMRC may be disproportionately high for relatively low value errors.

HMRC can only enquire into a tax return once, within specified time limits. If the time limit to open an enquiry has passed, discovery provisions allow HMRC to make an assessment to recover a loss of tax subject to conditions.

The government recognises the existing ‘one enquiry into a return’ gives certainty to taxpayers but there could be instances where the ability to open an enquiry into a specified issue, without affecting the ability to enquire into the full return at a later stage, could be beneficial. This includes cases where taxpayers have claimed a relief or are awaiting payment for relatively small amounts. One approach could be to amend existing enquiry powers to:

• enable HMRC to open a partial enquiry into a specific issue or section of a return. The issue would be stipulated in a new ‘partial enquiry notice’ and the checks would be related to that issue only
• have obligations on HMRC to work within specified time limits, subject to deadlines being met. There would be a reasonable expectation that the issues worked under this notice would be able to be worked and resolved quickly
• not affect the normal enquiry window and be subject to appropriate governance, in order to prevent usage that might be perceived as unfair. This might include an obligation on HMRC not to re-open any risk that had already been dealt with under a partial enquiry

Question 9: What are your views on introducing a partial enquiry power to allow an enquiry into a specific issue?

Question 10: In which circumstances do you think such a power might be deployed, and what would you see as appropriate taxpayer safeguards?

Question 11: What limitations do you think should be attached to the use of this power and why?

3. A new power to address non-compliance

Introduction

This chapter explores a new power which would require taxpayers to self correct their return. The proposal would introduce a statutory obligation on taxpayers to respond and, if required, act on a notice informing them when HMRC has reason to believe their return is incorrect.

This new power could be used where other approaches might seem disproportionate, such as one-to-one enquiries for small amounts. This would help HMRC collect the right tax more effectively and efficiently and could mean taxpayers avoid an unexpected tax bill further down the line.

The government is interested in views on this potential power, recognising there are design features that would need to be considered in detail. This includes the need for appropriate safeguards and proportionate sanctions.

A requirement for taxpayers to self correct

Self assessment is a well-established principle in taxation and represents the way in which many taxpayers make returns to HMRC, particularly for income and corporation tax. The obligations and expectations that underpin self assessment continue once the return has been submitted, if a taxpayer finds an error and voluntarily re-assesses.

A new power requiring taxpayers to self correct could broadly work as follows:

• HMRC would identify returns or claims with issues that have common features. Examples could include: several similar errors submitted by the same agent or discrepancies between third-party data and the tax return
• where there is evidence the issue might apply to a taxpayer, HMRC would issue a new taxpayer self correction notice. This notice would detail the issue and the reason why HMRC believes this has a high likelihood of affecting the taxpayer
• the taxpayer would have a legal obligation to respond to the notice by amending their return or claim within a set period or providing an explanation as to why no amendment is required

This power could allow taxpayers to review their position and correct any inaccuracies, without needing HMRC to pursue the risk further using more expansive enquiry powers, which can be more time consuming and costly for both HMRC and the taxpayer.

It could provide a quicker way to address common errors or inaccuracies and taxpayers an opportunity to understand where they may have made a mistake. Requiring the taxpayer to review and correct this error themselves could promote positive future behaviours, meaning a lower risk of repeated mistakes.

The presence of a legal obligation to respond could encourage taxpayers who might otherwise ignore a nudge or prompt to comply.

There is potential to utilise this model across a variety of tax regimes, risks and taxpayer groups, harmonising and simplifying HMRC’s approach.

This model would need to consider several design features, and the government is interested in stakeholder views on the following points.

Question 12: What are your views on how this power could be used? Where do you think this power could be applied most and least effectively?

Obligations

Certainty is important for trusted relationships. The power would oblige the taxpayer to provide a response to a new notice, but this could also be matched by an obligation on HMRC to respond within a specified timeframe.

It will be important for the notice to provide a clear and easily understood explanation of the specific risk and why HMRC believes the taxpayer’s return or claim could be affected by that risk. The notice should support the taxpayer in meeting their requirements, directing them to relevant guidance and legislation where appropriate.

There is also a question of what a reasonable timeframe for taxpayers to respond to a notice would be, and for HMRC to respond. There could be potential for HMRC to tailor its approach to the severity of the perceived issue, or the amount of money involved (for example, an identified error of several thousand pounds of tax might require a different approach to one where the amounts of money involved were less than this).

Question 13: What are your views on the merits and challenges of requiring taxpayers to respond to the new notice and correct their own return?

Question 14: What are your views on reasonable timeframes for a taxpayer to respond to a taxpayer correction notice and, subsequently, for HMRC to confirm its position?

Question 15: In addition to the above, what else might HMRC need to take into consideration when designing obligations?

Question 16: What are your views on any potential impacts, costs or burdens of introducing this approach?

Incentives and sanctions

To encourage compliance and be effective, there should be reasonable sanctions on those who do not respond to the notice within the specified period. These could include:

• additional monetary penalties,
• HMRC taking further action such as opening enquiries

Additional incentives to comply could include:

• reducing penalties under certain conditions such as an error despite taking reasonable care, or if the error is corrected within normal self correction timeframes
• HMRC providing the taxpayer with assurance that no further checks on this specific risk would be required, for the return in question

Any sanctions would need to be carefully designed to be proportionate and fair, whilst also deterring bad behaviour.

Question 17: What do you think would be an appropriate consequence for non-compliance with a notice, and what factors should HMRC take into consideration?

Question 18: What incentives could HMRC provide to encourage the taxpayer to comply with a notice in the specified timeframe?

Taxpayer safeguards

Any new power of this type would need to contain appropriate safeguards to ensure taxpayers are treated fairly and in accordance with their rights and the law.

There would need to be clear and reasonable grounds for believing the recipient had made an error on a tax return or claim, before issuing a notice. There would also need to be appropriate channels for dispute resolution in cases where the taxpayer and HMRC disagree on the taxpayer’s response, for example, on whether a correction is needed or not. This could include review and appeal rights for the taxpayer in relation to the notice.

HMRC would need to consider the form of the notice and whether this could be digital first, whilst also ensuring there were channels for digitally excluded taxpayers, or those who need additional support. Consideration would need to be given to how an agent, or others could respond on behalf of a taxpayer.

HMRC would need to put in place appropriate governance and resources in order to act upon taxpayer responses to the notices. This would ensure HMRC could accept the taxpayer’s response in a timely manner or take further action if required (such as progressing to the use of existing correction or enquiry powers).

Question 19: What are your views on the potential benefits and risks to this approach: for taxpayers, agents and HMRC?

Question 20: What do you believe would be appropriate and proportionate taxpayer safeguards?

4. Assessment of impacts

Summary of impacts

Year	2022 to 2023	2023 to 2024	2024 to 2025	2025 to 2026	2026 to 2027	2027 to 2028
Exchequer impact (£m)	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil

Any exchequer impact of these proposals will be assessed following consultation, final scope and design.

Exchequer Impact Assessment

Impacts	Comment
Economic impact	Publication of this consultation is not expected to have any significant macroeconomic impact Any economic impact of these proposals will be estimated following consultation, final scope and design, and will be subject to scrutiny by the Office for Budget Responsibility.
Impact on individuals, households and families	There are expected to be no impacts for individuals at present by publishing this consultation. Any future impacts of reforms, if taken forward by the government after consultation, will be fully examined and detailed.
Equalities impacts	It is not anticipated that there will be impacts on those in groups sharing protected characteristics. Any future impacts will be fully examined and detailed following any developments after the consultation.
Impact on businesses and Civil Society Organisations	There are expected to be no impacts for businesses and civil society organisations at present by publishing this consultation. Any future impacts will be fully examined and detailed.
Impact on HMRC or other public sector delivery organisations	Publication of this consultation is not expected to have any operational and delivery impacts or costs at this stage. Any future funding requirements will be assessed following the consultation.
Other impacts	Other impacts have been considered and none have been identified.

5. Summary of consultation questions

1. What are your views on introducing additional information requirements to other claims for tax reliefs and allowances?

2. Are there cases where this approach would be particularly helpful for customers?

3. How could any additional administrative costs be kept to a minimum?

4. What are your views on aligning the conditions for when HMRC can make corrections, so that they are the same across relevant regimes?

5. What are your views on aligning the ways that revenue correction notices can be rejected, so that they are the same across relevant regimes?

6. What are your views on introducing a mandatory requirement for taxpayers to provide evidence to support a rejection of a revenue correction notice?

7. Do you think this requirement should extend to HMRC explaining why a correction was made and what evidence is required?

8. What other ways could the revenue correction process be improved?

9. What are your views on introducing a partial enquiry power to allow an enquiry into a specific issue?

10. In which circumstances do you think such a power might be deployed, and what would you see as appropriate taxpayer safeguards?

11. What limitations do you think should be attached to the use of this power and why?

12. What are your views on how this power could be used? Where do you think this power could be applied most and least effectively?

13. What are your views on the merits and challenges of requiring taxpayers to respond to the new notice and correct their own return?

14. What are your views on reasonable timeframes for a taxpayer to respond to a taxpayer correction notice and, subsequently, for HMRC to confirm its position?

15. In addition to the above, what else might HMRC need to take into consideration when designing obligations?

16. What are your views on any potential impacts, costs or burdens of introducing this approach?

17. What do you think would be an appropriate consequence for non-compliance with a notice, and what factors should HMRC take into consideration?

18. What incentives could HMRC provide to encourage the taxpayer to comply with a notice in the specified timeframe?

19. What are your views on the potential benefits and risks to this approach: for taxpayers, agents and HMRC?

20. What do you believe would be appropriate and proportionate taxpayer safeguards?

6. The consultation process

This consultation is being conducted in line with the Tax Consultation Framework. There are 5 stages to tax policy development:

Stage 1: Setting out objectives and identifying options.

Stage 2: Determining the best option and developing a framework for implementation including detailed policy design.

Stage 3: Drafting legislation to effect the proposed change.

Stage 4: Implementing and monitoring the change.

Stage 5: Reviewing and evaluating the change.

This consultation is taking place during stage 1 of the process. The purpose of the consultation is to seek views on the policy design and any suitable possible alternatives, before consulting later on a specific proposal for reform.

How to respond

A summary of the questions in this consultation is included at chapter xx.

Responses should be sent by 22 January 2025, by email to [email protected].

Please do not send consultation responses to the Consultation Coordinator.

Paper copies of this document or copies in Welsh and alternative formats (large print, audio and Braille) may be obtained free of charge from the above address.

When responding please say if you are a business, individual or representative body. In the case of representative bodies please provide information on the number and nature of people you represent.

Confidentiality

HMRC is committed to protecting the privacy and security of your personal information. This privacy notice describes how we collect and use personal information about you in accordance with data protection law, including the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018.

Information provided in response to this consultation, including personal information, may be published or disclosed in accordance with the access to information regimes. These are primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), the DPA 2018, UK GDPR and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

If you want the information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please be aware that, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, there is a statutory Code of Practice with which public authorities must comply and which deals with, amongst other things, obligations of confidence. In view of this it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a request for disclosure of the information we will take full account of your explanation, but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on HM Revenue and Customs.

Consultation Privacy Notice

This notice sets out how we will use your personal data, and your rights. It is made under Articles 13 and/or 14 of the UK GDPR.

Your data

We will process the following personal data:

Name
Email address
Postal address
Phone number
Job title

Purpose

The purposes for which we are processing your personal data is: The Tax Administration Framework Review: New ways to tackle non-compliance

Legal basis of processing

The legal basis for processing your personal data is that the processing is necessary for the exercise of a function of a government department.

Recipients

Your personal data will be shared by us with HM Treasury.

Retention

Your personal data will be kept by us for 6 years and will then be deleted.

Your rights

You have the right to request information about how your personal data are processed, and to request a copy of that personal data.

You have the right to request that any inaccuracies in your personal data are rectified without delay.

You have the right to request that any incomplete personal data are completed, including by means of a supplementary statement.

You have the right to request that your personal data are erased if there is no longer a justification for them to be processed.

You have the right in certain circumstances (for example, where accuracy is contested) to request that the processing of your personal data is restricted.

Complaints

If you consider that your personal data has been misused or mishandled, you may make a complaint to the Information Commissioner, who is an independent regulator. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

0303 123 1113 [email protected]

Any complaint to the Information Commissioner is without prejudice to your right to seek redress through the courts.

Contact details

The data controller for your personal data is HMRC. The contact details for the data controller are:

HMRC
100 Parliament Street
Westminster
London
SW1A 2BQ

The contact details for HMRC’s Data Protection Officer are:

The Data Protection Officer
HMRC
14 Westfield Avenue
Stratford
London
E20 1HZ

[email protected]

Consultation principles

This call for evidence is being run in accordance with the government’s Consultation Principles.

The Consultation Principles are available on the Cabinet Office website.

If you have any comments or complaints about the consultation process, please contact the Consultation Coordinator.

Please do not send responses to the consultation to this link.