Osborne figure-fudge highlights UK government’s core conflict on avoidance

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Osborne figure-fudge highlights UK government’s core conflict on avoidance

osborne.jpg

COMMENT: George Osborne used inappropriate figures when boasting of the UK government’s success in clamping down on tax avoidance during the latest Budget, the UK Statistics Authority has found.

The mess of the figures Osborne is accused of making is an indication of the tightrope the Chancellor of the Exchequer is walking when it comes to tax avoidance. A policy of publicly criticising corporate tax optimisation strategies somewhat conflicts with reforming national tax policy to reduce corporate tax rates, provide patent-related incentives and relax controlled foreign company (CFC) regulations. However, the government argues there is no inconsistency: in exchange for a favourable tax regime it does not expect taxpayers to use aggressive avoidance techniques to pay less tax.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s Budget speech in March claimed that HMRC, the UK revenue collection agency, was collecting “twice as much as before” as a result of new compliance measures.

But those figures have since been shown to be estimates or target figures, rather than representing actual revenue collected by HMRC. The target figures were also based on a separate measurement to that used for the previous five-year election cycle, further skewing the “twice as much” Budget claim.

Balancing a competitive tax policy – “the most competitive in the G20” – with compliance claims such as those made in Osborne’s Budget speech, is not proving to be easy and the revelation about inappropriate collection statistics is evidence of the difficulty of the task.

Those that have accused the UK government of trumpeting an aggressive, zero tolerance attitude to corporate tax avoidance (Osborne has previously described aggressive tax avoidance as “morally repugnant”) while privately cosying up to companies will now feel they have another example to reinforce that claim.

But Sir Andrew Dilnot, head of the UK Statistics Authority, apportions most of the blame for Osborne’s Budget speech error to HMRC. The revenue authority changed its accounting method in 2010 to include revenue protected figures, which essentially allowed HMRC to include predictions of future tax to be paid by those found to have acted outside the law.

The change in accounting method meant figures presented to Osborne ahead of his Budget speech showed a compliance yield of £100 billion ($166 billion), compared with £52 billion for the five years leading up to the last election.

“We’ve discovered and corrected the overstated growth in compliance revenues for the last two years and we have made this clear in our annual report published in July 2014,” said a spokesperson for HMRC.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Pillar two compliance is creating unprecedented data demands for multinational tax departments, making closer collaboration with FP&A teams essential for accurate reporting and audit readiness
Among the arrivals is Andrew Howell, who leaves scandal-hit PwC Australia after representing PepsiCo in a high-profile TP dispute
ITR's podcast examines whether the big four have overarching cultural issues and assesses the competitive threat of technology-backed transfer pricing firms
The UK advisory firm has seen its global revenues expand by £27.2m following its listing and acquisition of Baker Tilly South-East Europe
Tax-trained John Sams, previously the firm’s CFO and COO, was appointed after a rigorous process, KPMG said
From Mauritius substance rules to Kenyan SEP tax and South African anti-avoidance measures, businesses must navigate growing scrutiny of cross-border IP structures in Africa
ITR spoke to multinationals, advisers and software providers about a June 30 deadline defined by faulty portals, high compliance costs and hard lessons
After years of onerous pillar two prep, businesses will be galled in seeing tax revenues outweighed by compliance costs
Tax advisers should revisit India secondment arrangements after the EY US ruling strengthened the Centrica precedent and raised fresh withholding concerns
Despite the shortfall, effective tax rates of multinationals have seen a ‘statistically significant rise’
Gift this article