.png)
.png)
Readers might have thought that my column this week would cover the Autumn Statement, but as I have set out my thoughts on page 8 of this issue I decided to cover something different here instead – regulation of the tax profession. You will have seen Taxation’s summary of the Wyman debate on regulation (10 November, page 8) and we have at least one follow-up article in the pipeline.
I have come to see this increasingly as a consumer protection issue. We sometimes forget how unusual the tax world is now in not placing any restrictions on who can set themselves as a tax adviser. The absence of any reference to tax on the list of regulated professions on the BEIS website (tinyurl.com/beisregprof) sticks out like a sore thumb.
There has been a tendency to look at this through the lens of the distinction between a qualified and unqualified adviser. Given my history with the ATT and CIOT, it is hardly surprising that I am a strong supporter of advisers being members of a professional body, but many individuals who have no formal tax qualification give excellent service to their clients. What we need are more effective controls over the way tax services are marketed. We have all seen websites encouraging people to make claims which are, to say the least, highly spurious and have been plagued by nuisance calls offering tax refunds. In pre-internet days, adverts in the local paper or the yellow pages probably did little harm but in regulatory terms we have hardly moved on and we need a proper debate on what should and should not be permitted.
I’d be interested in other views on whether there is a need for restrictions on advertising and, if so, what form they should take.
If you do one thing...
Note the new online service for approvals for the various venture capital schemes see Agent Update 102 (tinyurl.com/hmrcau102).
