header-logo header-logo

20 September 2012
Issue: 7530 / Categories: Legal News , Tax
printer mail-detail

Taxman targets lawyers

HMRC to crack down on London lawyers’ tax evasion

London lawyers have been identified as “high risk” candidates for tax evasion and are to be specifically targeted by a new HMRC taskforce.

Launching the taskforce this week, HMRC said it expected to recover more than £19.5m by going after five groups – the legal profession in London; grocery and retail in specific pockets of the UK; the beauty industry in the North East; restaurants in the South East and Solent; and the motor trade in Scotland.

HMRC’s Mike Eland, director general of enforcement and compliance, said: “This is not an empty threat ... We are on target to collect more than £50m as a result of taskforces launched in 2011/12.”

However, Bar Council chairman Michael Todd QC queried why HMRC had “chosen to proceed in this manner” rather than engaging with the relevant professional bodies.

“It is not, at present, clear to us exactly why the legal profession has been targeted by HMRC,” he said. “The Bar Council expects barristers, like any other group of taxpayers, to meet their tax obligations. My predecessor, Peter Lodder QC, wrote to David Gauke MP [the exchequer secretary] last December, to invite him to discuss barristers’ liability to pay taxes for work which has been done, but for which the fees had not been paid by the government. He declined to meet us, and we were unaware, until yesterday, that HMRC had specific concerns about the tax affairs of lawyers.”

A Law Society spokesperson said: “HMRC have a responsibility to collect all taxes that are due and we welcome their commitment to conduct their investigations sensitively and in confidence until complete. While there can be no excuse for unlawful tax evasion by any individual, the vast majority of the 125,000 solicitors in England and Wales deal with their tax affairs diligently and responsibly despite the complexity of the tax code.”

 

Issue: 7530 / Categories: Legal News , Tax
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll