| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
14 Oct 2003 : Column 9W—continued
Cigarettes
Mr. Dobson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the limits are on the importation of cigarettes into Britain by individuals who have bought them within the European Union (a) paying the duty levied in the country of purchase and (b) from a duty-free outlet. [132147]
John Healey: Since the introduction of the Single Market in 1993, travellers making journeys within the EU have been able to bring back as many duty and tax paid cigarettes as they like, providing they are for their own use. Cigarettes may not be brought into the UK for any form of sale or reimbursement without payment of UK taxes. There are no limits on importations of this kind.
Travellers bringing back excise goods into the UK may be required to explain to Customs the purposes for which they are holding those goods. EU agreements establish guidelines to help Member States determine whether goods are imported for 'own use' or for commercial purposes, including provision for a minimum indicative level of 800 cigarettes. The UK applies an indicative level of 3200 cigarettes, which is one of the factors Customs will use in assessing travellers' explanations of the purposes for which they are holding excise goods.
On 1 July 1999, duty and VAT-free sales of goods to intra-EU travellers were abolished, and travellers cannot now make duty-free purchases when travelling between EU Member States.
Transfer Pricing
Mr. Gray: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to his answer of 8 September, Official Report, column 103W, what the recovery upon transfer pricing
14 Oct 2003 : Column 10W
cases of tax, interest and penalties was in each of the years 1999–2000 to 2001–02 arising from (a) LBO led cases and (b) Revenue Policy (International) led cases which taken all together amount to the £1.7 billion referred to in the Commissioners of Inland Revenue's Supplementary Memorandum published in the 29 Report of the Committee of Public Accounts, Session 2002–03, HC 332. [132186]
Dawn Primarolo: The recovery from transfer pricing cases was as follows:
| LBO | RP International | |
|---|---|---|
| 1999–2000 | 35.1 | 1.09 |
| 2000–2001 | 55 | 241.1 |
| 2001–2002 | 87 | 196.6 |
| Total 1705.8 | ||
Aggregates Levy/Landfill Tax
Paul Flynn: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been lost to the National Insurance Fund by reductions in contributions by employers to compensate for the aggregates levy and landfill tax, in each year since they were introduced. [132274]
Dawn Primarolo: The reduction in contributions to the National Insurance Fund to compensate for the aggregates levy is £0.4 billion in 2002–03 and estimated to be £0.4 billion in 2003–04. These figures are rounded to the nearest £0.1 billion.
It is not possible to calculate the effects of the compensation for the landfill tax on the NIF due to the structural changes to secondary NICs in 1999.
Affordable Warmth Programme
Mr. Flight: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the cost to public funds in terms of tax receipts forgone was of the affordable warmth programme in each year since its introduction. [131492]
John Healey: The Finance Act 2000 made capital allowances available specifically for spending on equipment for leasing under an approved affordable warmth programme, a Government administered scheme which aims to support the installation of efficient central heating systems in up to 1 million low income homes over five years. Finance for the programme is provided by commercial leasing packages, administered
14 Oct 2003 : Column 11W
through local authorities, with Transco (the pipeline arm of British Gas plc) guaranteeing the residual value of the installed equipment.
The estimated cost to the Exchequer of capital allowances for approved affordable warmth programmes is given in the Financial Statement and Budget Report 2003 [HC 500].
Air Quality
Bob Spink: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make it his policy to create fiscal incentives for cleaner vehicles by co-ordinating rates of taxation on benefits-in-kind with the Government's Air Quality policies. [131687]
John Healey: It has been a long-standing policy of the Governments to introduce cost-effective measures to help reduce the impact that transport has on the environment.
To incentivise cleaner cars, the Government have introduced emission-based reforms for graduated company car tax and fuel scale charges—the charge on free fuel provided for employees. These CO2-based benefit-in-kind taxes have helped reward the purchase of cleaner cars and the progress made is reflected in the 3.75 per cent. fall in average CO2 emissions of new cars between 2000 and 2002.
In addition to progress on CO2, local air pollution has improved dramatically with falls in emissions of particulates and NOx from new vehicles, for example new cars now produce in the region of 90 per cent. less pollutants than those manufactured 20 years ago. This has been driven by successively tougher emissions standards for new cars and given that company cars are generally less than two years old, means they are delivering air quality improvements. To help facilitate this progress, the Government have incorporated air quality incentives into the company car tax regime. There are discounts for cars that use alternative fuels and technologies, for example road fuel gases, and supplements for diesel cars in recognition of their higher emissions of pollutants that damage local air quality. This approach helps ensure there are benefits for the drivers of the very cleanest cars along with benefits for the environment.
Furthermore, to provide incentives for the use of alternatives to the car, in 1998 the Government announced a package of measures, which included removal of benefits-in-kind charges on employer-provided works buses and on public bus subsidies, and new reliefs for commuter and business cycling.
ASPIRE Programme
Mr. Gray: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to his answer of 8 September 2003, Official Report, column 96W, on the ASPIRE programme, if he will list the potential suppliers with whom the Inland Revenue had engaged in a market-making exercise as part of its plan for the ASPIRE project, indicating in each case whether Inland Revenue or the supplier approached the other first in this matter; when the market-making exercise was (a) conceived by Inland Revenue, (b) launched with these potential suppliers and (c) completed; and how much (i) tax, (ii) interest
14 Oct 2003 : Column 12W
and (iii) in penalties had been recovered from the suppliers as a whole as a consequence of Inland Revenue compliance activities in the 36 months leading up to the launch with these potential suppliers of the market-making exercise. [131370]
Dawn Primarolo: The potential suppliers the Inland Revenue engaged with as part of the market making exercise for the ASPIRE project were:
- Accenture
American Management Systems (AMS)
Capita
Cap Gemini Ernst and Young (CGEY)
Computer Science Corporation (CSC)
Electronic Data Services (EDS)
Hewlett Packard (HP)
International Business Machines Corporation (IBM)
Fujitsu Services
CMG Logica
Microsoft
PWC Consulting
Science Application International Corporation (SAIC)
Schlumberger Sema
The Market Making exercise was conceived by the Inland Revenue between August and October 2001, and was launched on 31 October 2001. The exercise continued until 10 May 2002—the closing date for responding to the OJEC notice for the competition. Not all of the potential suppliers responded to the OJEC notice. In addition, an open meeting was held for all interested suppliers on 7 March 2002, which was attended by 42 potential suppliers.
It is a long-standing principle that information provided to the Inland Revenue for tax purposes is treated as confidential and not disclosed to anyone else without the taxpayer's consent. Exceptions to the principle arise only in very restricted circumstances, such as orders by the court to provide information or where Parliament has sanctioned disclosure by specific statutory provisions. There are statutory provisions to ensure confidentiality of taxpayer information and any unauthorised disclosure is a criminal offence. It is for these reasons that I am unable to provide the hon. Member with the information that the hon. Member seeks on these companies.
Mr. Gray: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to his Answer of 8th September, Official Report, column 103W, what criteria were set for the payment of performance related pay in the years 1999–2000 to 2002–03 to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue or their officers, in support of Project ASPIRE or its antecedents. [132187]
Dawn Primarolo: For staff in departmental (grades) pay bands payment of performance pay was dependent upon satisfactory performance measured against an individual's performance agreement. Each performance agreement sets out an individual's key responsibilities and objectives relative to ASPIRE and any other key business objectives they may have had for the years in question. The performance and contribution of the
14 Oct 2003 : Column 13W
commissioners and other staff in the Senior Civil Service is additionally assessed in relation to that of others in the same pay band.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |