08 Oct 2009, David Jetuah, AccountancyAge
http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/1779531/fds-lurch-unknown
Legislation underpinning a tax compliance crackdown on finance directors in the UK’s 2,000 biggest companies is so vague that experts and FDs still don’t know how to meet its demands.
FDs are now required to personally sign off on their companies’ tax arrangements but the legislation is so loosely worded, according to tax advisers, it remains a potential minefield despite already coming into force.
Advisers have panned the imprecise nature of the wording for senior accounting officers to take “reasonable steps” to ensure the company maintains “appropriate tax accounting arrangements” and in particular, monitors the accounting arrangements of the company “to identify any aspects in which those arrangements are not appropriate tax accounting arrangements”.
“We are very concerned at the potential for headaches,” said Richard Baron, head of tax at the Institute of Directors.
“The government could so easily have consulted in advance on the principle of this one. We might even have found a way that would not have created the administrative burdens, and that would not have required vague legislation.
Instead, they just went at it like a bull at a gate.
“You can see how little thinking they had done, even internally, because as soon as the finance bill was published, they announced amendments.”
Businesses must also ensure they establish, maintain, monitor and certify appropriate accounting arrangements for the entire company. This includes identifying “any respects in which those arrangements are not appropriate”.
The maximum penalty for non-compliance is relatively small at £10,000, but the extra workload and the potential for not meeting the rules form the main concerns.
John Whiting, head of tax policy at the Chartered Institute of Taxation, said: “There’s a hell of a lot of work going on by finance directors and they are saying ‘how on earth are we going to achieve this?’”
“It’s like being told to take a train to Brighton beach on a Sunday when half the tracks are under repair. No disrepect to Brighton, but it’s not the nicest, sandiest beach in the world either,” said Whiting.
“FDs will want assurance in detail that the systems meet the standard, and that will mean a lot of work,” added Baron.
KPMG flagged up the scope of the legislation earlier this month. “Our view is that companies should be seeking at least to understand their current operating framework and the end to end tax arrangements so that they are better prepared to deal with potential shortcomings sooner, rather than later,” the firm said in a briefing paper.
After officially kicking off in July, the legislation came into effect on 1 October for those with accounting periods ending on 30 September.
An HM Revenue & Customs spokeswoman said: “Large companies make a major contribution to the Exchequer and while most already maintain appropriate tax accounting arrangements some do not. The government made a number of changes to the legislation to meet businesses’ concerns.”
Further reading
© Incisive Media Investments Limited 2012, Published by Incisive Financial Publishing Limited, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4RX, are companies registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 04252091 & 04252093
Visitor comments
Just take responsibility
It could be that HMRC recognised the costs incurred by all those companies who struggled to apply the SOX 'rules' when they wrote the guidance to Senior Accounting Officers. The examples published by HMRC are really rather practical and give a reasonable idea of the responsibility the SAO is expected to take. Personally I think that in terms of what might be considered a director's responsibility to be prepared to stand by the skill and care he/she puts into their job, what is currently required is actually no different. I have read of FDs who are confident that their existing processes are sufficient and are not planning to do anything differently when they sign for the first time. All that is required is that directors take steps to actually know whether there are any obvious gaps in the processes - rather than hope or assume. What shareholders would expect anything different.
Posted by: SK, TW2 , 09 Oct 2009 | 00:00
Risk based and proportionate
The imprecise wording of the new legislation does present companies with a lot of uncertainty, which may leave Senior Accounting Officers feeling exposed, particularly in light of the personal fines which could result from a failure to comply. In order to gain some assurance on potential areas of risk and weaknesses companies should consider a high level risk review of its tax control environment in the first instance, sooner rather than later. This should enable companies to address and recitify any weaknesses in a manner which is risk based and proportionate, prior to engaging in dialogue with their Customer Relationship Manager.
Posted by: Yvonne Chappell, Grant Thornton UK LLP , 14 Oct 2009 | 00:00