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

Valid pillar two objectives are still intact after the side-by-side agreement, but whether the framework is now settled is ‘a $64,000 question’, Morrison Foerster’s tax chair told ITR
Ian Halligan previously led Baker Tilly’s international tax services in the US
Exclusive ITR data emphasises that DEI does not affect in-house buying decisions – and it’s nothing to do with the US president
The firms made senior hires in Los Angeles and Cleveland respectively; in other news, South Korea reported an 11% rise in tax income, fuelled by a corporation tax boom
The ‘deeply flawed’ report is attempting to derail UN tax convention debates, the Tax Justice Network’s CEO said
Salim Rahim, a TP specialist, had been a partner at Baker McKenzie since 2010
While the manual should be consulted for any questions around MAPs, the OECD’s Sriram Govind also emphasised that the guidance is ‘not a political commitment’
The landmark Indian Supreme Court judgment redefines GAAR, JAAR and treaty safeguards, rejects protections for indirect transfers and tightens conditions for Mauritius‑based investors claiming DTAA relief
The expansion introduces ‘business-level digital capabilities’ for tax professionals, the US tax agency said
As tax teams face pressure from complex rules and manual processes, adopting clear ownership, clean data and adaptable technology is essential, writes Russell Gammon, chief innovation officer at Tax Systems
Gift this article