header-logo header-logo

Confidence in the taxman?

06 January 2017 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7728 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail
nlj_7728_dobson

Confidential information held by public bodies for public purposes should be treated with the utmost care in accordance with statutory conditions, warns Nicholas Dobson

  • HMRC was not entitled to disclose confidential information to journalists on the basis that it was incidental to HMRC’s functions.

When you visit your doctor you expect your personal medical disclosures to be kept confidential. In other words they won’t be disclosed other than with your consent and for proper professional purposes to promote your health and well-being. Similar expectations apply to all professional interactions. And of course with that often unwelcome emanation of the state, HMRC—Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.

But just how trustworthy are the tax people in these matters? Under what rules do tax officials operate and can they justifiably talk rather loosely and “off the record” to the press? A recent decision of the Supreme Court looked at this particular issue and considered the nature and extent of the statutory powers governing disclosure of information held for HMRC functions.

The case in question was R

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll