|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 22 October 2010, Official Report, column 896W, on the EC budget, whether he plans to discuss at EU level the re-orientation of the EU budget towards addressing issues of climate change and energy security. 
Justine Greening: The Government engage regularly and actively on EU reform issues with other EU member states and with our EU partners at all levels. Formal negotiations of the future of the EU Budget will begin when the EU Commission issue their proposal for the 2014-2020 Financial Framework, expected by July 2011.
The Government believe the EU Budget should reflect the fiscal deficit. However, within that framework, the EU should modernise its budget to do more to tackle
the challenges of the 21st century: global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty. But this must not come at the cost of higher EU spending overall.
Priti Patel: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the cost to his Department and its non-departmental public bodies of implementing and monitoring compliance with legislation transposing EU requirements in each year since 1997; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Hoban: It is not standard accounting practice to distinguish regulatory costs from overall running costs, whether of EU origin or domestic. There is therefore no pre-existing breakdown of the costs imposed on it by EU legislation upon which the Department can draw to produce an estimate of such compliance. Any such information that does exist is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
The foregone duty can be approximated by applying the full duty rate to small breweries' clearances. This gives us an estimated cost to the Exchequer of £125 million since 2002-03. However this does not account for any reduction in clearances that may have resulted if the relief was not in place; over this period the number of breweries utilising the small breweries relief has grown from under 400 to over 650.
|Number||Clearances (hl)||Estimated Exchequer cost (£m)|
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been paid to employees in arrears under national minimum wage legislation following enforcement action by HM Revenue and Customs since 6 April 2009. 
Mr Gauke: HMRC has identified minimum wage arrears of almost £6.7 million between April 2009 and the end of October 2010. Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs does not keep separate statistics on the amount of arrears paid or not paid to workers.
Mr Betts: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) whether he has had discussions with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on the Financial Service Authority's estimate of the likely effect on house prices of its mortgage market proposals; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on the implications for its policy on home ownership of the effects on the availability of mortgage finance of the implementation of the Financial Service Authority's mortgage market proposals; 
(3) whether he has made an assessment of the likely effects of the implementation of the Financial Service Authority's mortgage market proposals on the (a) housing market, (b) level of availability of mortgages and (c) supply of new homes; 
(4) whether he has discussed with the Council of Mortgage Lenders (a) the Financial Service Authority's responsible lending proposals and (b) the likely effects on the housing market of their implementation; 
(5) what mechanisms will be in place to ensure that (a) self-employed and (b) other future home-buyers with variable incomes will have access to mortgages under the Financial Service Authority's proposals for the mortgage market; 
The Government believe that it is right for the FSA to ensure that the UK mortgage market has responsible lending practices. We will continue to work with the FSA, mortgage lenders and intermediaries, and consumer groups to ensure a mortgage market that is sustainable for all participants.
The FSA has stated that it will fully assess the potential impact on the market before implementing any rule changes. Further, the FSA will consult in 2011 on transitional measures to help mitigate any adverse effects on existing borrowers.
Treasury Ministers and officials have discussions with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. As was the case with previous administrations, it is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such discussions.
Mr Hoban: Decisions concerning the pricing and availability of mortgages remain commercial decisions for individual banks and building societies. The Government do not seek to intervene in these decisions.
The Government are committed to fostering diversity and promoting competition in the banking sector. A competitive banking sector ensures that the economy benefits from the right quantity of banking products and services on offer at an economically efficient price. Competition is also a spur to innovation and economic growth.
Harriett Baldwin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the proposed national insurance holiday for employers establishing new businesses will apply to new constituency offices opened by hon. Members first elected in 2010. 
Mr Gauke: The regional employer national insurance Contributions holiday for new businesses applies to new businesses set up on or after 22 June 2010. For the purposes of the holiday a business is defined as a trade, profession or vocation, or property businesses or investment businesses.
Andrew George: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will analyse the potential effects across (a) household income distribution and (b) household spending distribution of overall spending reductions agreed in the spending review; 
(2) if he will analyse the potential effects across (a) household income distribution and (b) household spending distribution of spending reductions by each Department agreed in the spending review. 
Justine Greening: For the first time at the spending review, the distributional impacts of changes in tax, welfare and Departmental Expenditure Limits have been presented. Chart B.6 (p100) in Annex B of the spending review shows that the top 20% of earners contribute most to the fiscal consolidation as a percentage of net income and benefits-in-kind. Given that no changes to indirect taxation were announced at spending review, distributional impacts by expenditure distribution have not been shown in the document. Estimates of indirect tax measures announced at the June Budget by expenditure decile can be found in Charts A3 and A4 (p68) in Annex A of the June Budget.
Ms Bagshawe: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been spent on the Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises Research and Development tax credit scheme since its inception; and how many businesses have participated in that scheme. 
Claire Perry: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate HM Revenue and Customs has made of the cost to British businesses of implementing the new iXBRL data system in the financial year (a) 2010-11 and (b) 2011-12. 
Mr Gauke: HMRC published an updated impact assessment in April 2009. The work on XBRL was largely qualitative, rather than quantitative. There have been rapid developments in the XBRL market over recent months, and HMRC will be reviewing the figures shown in the impact assessment using its normal post implementation procedures in due course.
Eric Ollerenshaw: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much HM Revenue and Customs has spent on legal costs in cases involving the FA Premier League and clubs playing in that league in each of the last five years. 
Some of these costs are recoverable from other parties. Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd ("PCFC") was ordered to pay HMRC's legal costs of its unsuccessful attempt to have HMRC's winding-up petition struck out. These were agreed by the joint administrators of PCFC in the sum of £100,000. This is, however, a debt which is subject to the terms of PCFC's company voluntary arrangement ("CVA"), and HMRC therefore only expects to recover these costs to the extent of 20p in the £.
The joint administrators of PCFC were also ordered to pay HMRC's legal costs of its challenge to the validity of their appointment. These costs are an expense of the administration and so are not subject to the terms of the CVA. HMRC therefore expects to recover these costs in full. The amount of these costs has yet to be agreed between HMRC and the joint administrators of PCFC.
Finally, HMRC was ordered to pay the legal costs of the joint administrators of PCFC in relation to HMRC's unsuccessful challenge to the CVA in the High Court. The joint administrators' claim was for £335,000 and HMRC has been ordered to pay £200,000 of this on account. The final liability under this head will only be known once the joint administrators' claim has been subject to detailed assessment by the court. It will not under any circumstances exceed £335,000 plus the costs of assessment; but it may in the event be substantially less than £335,000 depending upon the view that the court takes of the reasonableness of the amounts claimed.
Jim McGovern: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate his Department has made of the potential effect of the implementation of proposed changes in the benefits system on the number of people employed by HM Revenue and Customs at its offices (a) in Dundee and (b) nationally. 
Priti Patel: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 23 November 2010, Official Report, column 274W, on incentives, what activities HM Revenue and Customs sponsored in 2009-10; and how much it spent on each sponsorship activity. 
The amount spent on sponsorship in 2009-10 was £542,034. This was spent on the development and production of The Business Inspector TV programme. This figure includes all related fees, website support and sponsorship advertising but excludes VAT.
Hywel Williams: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what commission rates apply to the contracts of HM Revenue and Customs for tax debts collection services with (a) Commercial Collection Services Ltd, (b) Credit Solutions Ltd, (c) Fairfax Solicitors Ltd and (d) iQor Recovery Services Ltd. 
Mr Meacher: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the tax yield from a financial activities tax levied at a rate of (a) 0.01 per cent., (b) 0.025 per cent, (c) 0.05 per cent., (d) 0.1 per cent and (e) 1 per cent. on (i) all UK financial institutions and (ii) internal UK financial transactions. 
Mr Hoban: The International Monetary Fund (IMF) report for the G20, 'A Fair and Substantial Contribution by the Financial Sector', endorses a financial activities tax (FAT) which would be levied on the sum of certain profits and remuneration in the financial sector. The IMF report puts forward several potential designs for a FAT. As announced in the June Budget, the Government are currently examining the costs and benefits of a FAT. At this stage it is not possible to estimate revenues.
Mr David Davis: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) how many inquiries under controlled foreign companies legislation had been settled in (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10 and (c) 2010-11 on the latest date for which figures are available.; 
Mr Hoban [holding answer 18 November 2010]: It is difficult to give a precise answer to this question as the controlled foreign company (CFC) inquiry is often part of a wider investigation. However, our best estimate of the number of inquiries that are open under the controlled foreign companies legislation is 190.
Similarly CFC issues will have featured in settlements as part of a wider investigation of a number of issues, but our best estimate of the number of inquiries that have been settled under the controlled foreign companies legislation in the following years is:
Mr Gauke: Treasury Ministers hold meetings with and receive representations from a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. It is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such meetings and representations.
Damian Hinds: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what representations he has received from sixth form colleges and further education colleges on community use of their facilities and the value added tax rate applied to building construction; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) if he will change the threshold of community usage of facilities of sixth form colleges and further education colleges above which buildings construction becomes liable for value added tax in order to encourage colleges to make their facilities more widely available to the community. 
The construction costs of a building intended to be used solely for a relevant charitable use (that is, use by a charity for a non-business purpose) are zero-rated for VAT. This could include buildings used by sixth form and further education colleges.
For those establishments, based on individual circumstances, HMRC accept that a building does not need to be used wholly for non-business activity to qualify for the zero rate. For simplification purposes and by application of their collection and management powers, HMRC accept that such a building can be zero-rated providing its relevant use is at least 95%. Reducing the relevant use below this figure would constitute an extension of the zero rate, which we are prevented from doing under agreements with our EU partners.