Goldman Sachs’ HMRC tax deal to face judicial review

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

Goldman Sachs’ HMRC tax deal to face judicial review

goldman2.jpg

Tax avoidance campaign group, UK Uncut Legal Action, has been given permission to challenge the conclusion of a tax dispute between Goldman Sachs and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) that the campaigners allege cost the UK millions of pounds.

A High Court judge ruled the group had “an arguable case” that should go to a full judicial review hearing after its lawyers claimed HMRC failed to carry out its legal duty to renegotiate a deal with the bank after it emerged the government had a mistake in the original talks.

This news came a day before the National Audit Office (NAO) released a report stating that taxpayers are at risk of not getting the best deal when it comes to negotiating a tax settlement with HMRC, highlighting flaws in the tax authority’s governance procedures.


Concerns were raised last year by a HMRC whistleblower about a settlement made by the tax authorities with Goldman Sachs over a tax avoidance scheme used by the bank to pay its staff.

goldman.gif
The Comptroller & Auditor General, the head of the National Audit Office, which scrutinises public spending on behalf of Parliament, told a parliamentary committee that a mistake in the calculation of the interest bill, which HMRC has admitted to, resulted in a loss of £8 million ($12 million) for the exchequer.

However, a whistleblower told the committee that the interest due on the settlement could have been up to £20 million.

UK Uncut Legal Action has accused HMRC officials of giving the bank a favourable deal. The group claim these accusations can be backed up by HMRC’s internal minutes from December 2010 which showed the involvement of Dave Hartnett (pictured below), permanent secretary for tax at HMRC, in the agreement which allowed the bank to repay only the amount owed.

hartnett.jpg

UK Uncut will now be allowed to bring a full hearing for judicial review of the agreement and could lead to HMRC disclosing internal and confidential documents about the settlement.

Murray Worthy, director of UK Uncut Legal Action said: "There is overwhelming public support from unions, NGOs, MPs and thousands of ordinary people who want to see this dodgy tax deal challenged in the courts. It shows the deep level of outrage that people feel over state sanctioned tax dodging by big business, while the government destroys public services that ordinary people rely on, saying that there is no money.”



 

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

In looking at the impact of taxation, money won't always be all there is to it
Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board is set to kick off 2026 with a new secretary to head the administrative side of its regulatory activities.
Ireland’s Department of Finance reported increased income tax, VAT and corporation tax receipts from 2024; in other news, it’s understood that HSBC has agreed to pay the French treasury to settle a tax investigation
The Australian Taxation Office believes the Swedish furniture company has used TP to evade paying tax it owes
Supermarket chain Morrisons is facing a £17 million ($23 million) tax bill; in other news, Donald Trump has cut proposed tariffs
The controversial deal will allow US-parented groups to be carved out from key aspects of pillar two
Awards
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2027 World Tax rankings and the 2026 ITR Tax Awards globally
Pillar two was ‘weakened’ when it altered from a multinational convention agreement to simply national domestic law, Federico Bertocchi also argued
Imposing the tax on virtual assets is a measure that appears to have no legal, economic or statistical basis, one expert told ITR
The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
Gift this article