There is no distinction between the advice accountants give out on tax
compared with lawyers, the ICAEW argued in court yesterday in its battle to win
professional privilege for tax advisers.
The ICAEW appeared before the Court of Appeal in the Prudential case
yesterday, where the insurer previously lost its argument against HM Revenue
& Customs that tax advice received from its accounting advisers should be
confidential under legal professional privilege, the same as solicitors.
Charles Flint QC, representing the ICAEW told the court you “can’t
distinguish between the two”.
“They are performing the same function in the same context,” argued Flint.
“Advice on tax is advice on law. What qualification gives accountants room to
advise on law? It’s the study of taxation. The institute has the overriding
interest of acting in the public interest.”
Flint said there was no ground for a distinction between the quality of
advice between that set in terms of training between chartered accountants and
The court will hear from the Law Society today, expected to argue that
privilege should be retained by the legal profession.
The hearing continues today.
HMRC breaches client confidentiality; and partner profits fall at EY. These stories and more discussed in Friday Afternoon Live
Does Darwin's theory apply to taxation? Colin ponders...
The UK tax gap fell in 2014-15 to its lowest-ever level of 6.5%, revealed official statistics published today
"The whole idea of HMRC officials supplying confidential information about individuals to the media on a non-attributable basis is, or should be, a matter of serious concern," say Supreme Court judges