Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Inland Revenue
1. This note adds the results for two Service
Delivery Agreement targets for ITSA and explains a change in the
basis of the figures. It also clarifies the figures we gave in
a recent answer to a Parliamentary Question from Matthew Taylor.
2. The table below completes the figures
given in paragraph 16 of our memorandum.
You will see from column G that filing performance has improved
by 0.5 per cent from last year.
3. To give a more realistic view of performance,
we have also looked at the basis of these figures. As a result
we have excluded a conservative estimate of the number of returns
never received by taxpayersfor instance, when they are
issued before we find out that a taxpayer has changed address.
To do this, we carried out a sampling exercise, involving our
operational research specialists and Internal Audit Office, and
made an adjustment. Columns B and H (in italics) show the rebased
figures. Both the original and the rebased figures show that the
downward filing trend has been reversed this year.
|Year||Returns issued at 31 October
|Rebased to exclude returns not received by taxpayers
||Returns issued at 31 March|
|Returns received at 30 September|
|Per cent received|
|Returns received at 31 January|
|Per cent received|
|Rebased per cent received|
|* We are sorry that there was a typing error for these two figures in the original table.
** Figures not yet available.
*** Final figures will be available shortly
4. The results for our two Service Delivery Agreement
SA filing targets for this year are therefore:
|Percentage of SA returns filed on time
|Percentage of SA returns filed within 12 months of the due date
5. You also raised a question about the figures in our
answer to Matthew Taylor's PQ of 26 February. We agree that the
figure for returns issued by 4 November is wrong. We will write
to Matthew Taylor correcting this figure, and will copy you that
letter. As the background
note to the parliamentary question says, these figures are interim
numbers and do not affect our reported results.
5 March 2002
See Ev 3. Back
Not printed. Back