One minute with Mike Truman, immediate former editor of Taxation magazine.
This month sees you step down as editor of Taxation magazine after ten years at the helm. How has the tax landscape changed during that time?
At almost every CPD lecture I give, I point out that everything
HMRC does has to be understood in the context of losing nearly half its staff in the past decade or so – 104,000 at the time of the merger between Inland Revenue and Customs & Excise, about 60,000 now. I think it’s behind a range of decisions, from the continual use of disclosure opportunities to the near-collapse of local Working Together groups.
Whom in tax do you most admire?
It’s not an individual so much as an attitude – those who volunteer their time to improve the way the system works. Whether that is helping at TaxAid or Tax Volunteers, serving on institute committees, or taking part in formal and informal consultations, tax people have an admirable commitment to serving their profession.
You memorably called Margaret Hodge ‘tax prat of the year’ in 2013. The following year, as chairman of the judging panel of the Taxation awards, you gave her the ‘tax personality’ award. What was your thinking here?
I’ve explained this in my final Taxation editorial. I called her tax prat of the year specifically for her implication that two KPMG secondees into HM Treasury had helped write tax law so they could return to practice and advise their clients on how to get round it, and I still stand by that. I chaired, and agreed with, the panel that gave her tax personality of the year, which she received because she simply was the dominant person in tax last year. Love her or loathe her, she has almost single-handedly changed the public attitude towards tax avoidance.
If you could make one change to UK tax law, what would it be?
I would introduce purpose and principle clauses at the start of each chapter of tax legislation, and then remove as many as possible of the specific anti-avoidance provisions. For example, ITEPA 2003 Part 7 should start by saying something like: ‘The purpose of this chapter is to charge to income tax as earnings any remuneration paid to an employee in the form of securities, whether directly or indirectly, unless it is of a type that is specifically exempted. Where such remuneration is not exempted but does not fall fully within one of the charging provisions, it should be charged to tax by reference to those provisions which most nearly cover it.’ That gives judges something on which to hang a purposive interpretation.
What’s next for Mike Truman?
About half my time will still be spent in tax, mostly lecturing. For the rest, the plan is to watch a bit of cricket, go for more walks, and study areas I have been interested in but never had time to pursue, such as art history. But the reality may well be Game of Thrones box sets…
Tell us a secret.
I was the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Ealing Southall in the 1987 general election. I lost, but I did reduce Labour’s majority by a third. I was known to the other Conservative candidates as the one who ‘argued with Maggie Thatcher’. The story is that, at a conference shortly before the election, we were all being wheeled in one at a time for a thirty second photo-op to go in our election leaflets. The big topic at the time was massive rises in property taxes (‘rates’) by Labour councils. As I was introduced she said: ‘Ah, the rates in Ealing have gone up 87%, haven’t they.’ ‘Er, 83%, prime minister.’ Smile, flash, click. She fixed me with that glare, and I left…
Mike Truman is the immediate former editor of Taxation magazine
One minute with Mike Truman, immediate former editor of Taxation magazine.
This month sees you step down as editor of Taxation magazine after ten years at the helm. How has the tax landscape changed during that time?
At almost every CPD lecture I give, I point out that everything
HMRC does has to be understood in the context of losing nearly half its staff in the past decade or so – 104,000 at the time of the merger between Inland Revenue and Customs & Excise, about 60,000 now. I think it’s behind a range of decisions, from the continual use of disclosure opportunities to the near-collapse of local Working Together groups.
Whom in tax do you most admire?
It’s not an individual so much as an attitude – those who volunteer their time to improve the way the system works. Whether that is helping at TaxAid or Tax Volunteers, serving on institute committees, or taking part in formal and informal consultations, tax people have an admirable commitment to serving their profession.
You memorably called Margaret Hodge ‘tax prat of the year’ in 2013. The following year, as chairman of the judging panel of the Taxation awards, you gave her the ‘tax personality’ award. What was your thinking here?
I’ve explained this in my final Taxation editorial. I called her tax prat of the year specifically for her implication that two KPMG secondees into HM Treasury had helped write tax law so they could return to practice and advise their clients on how to get round it, and I still stand by that. I chaired, and agreed with, the panel that gave her tax personality of the year, which she received because she simply was the dominant person in tax last year. Love her or loathe her, she has almost single-handedly changed the public attitude towards tax avoidance.
If you could make one change to UK tax law, what would it be?
I would introduce purpose and principle clauses at the start of each chapter of tax legislation, and then remove as many as possible of the specific anti-avoidance provisions. For example, ITEPA 2003 Part 7 should start by saying something like: ‘The purpose of this chapter is to charge to income tax as earnings any remuneration paid to an employee in the form of securities, whether directly or indirectly, unless it is of a type that is specifically exempted. Where such remuneration is not exempted but does not fall fully within one of the charging provisions, it should be charged to tax by reference to those provisions which most nearly cover it.’ That gives judges something on which to hang a purposive interpretation.
What’s next for Mike Truman?
About half my time will still be spent in tax, mostly lecturing. For the rest, the plan is to watch a bit of cricket, go for more walks, and study areas I have been interested in but never had time to pursue, such as art history. But the reality may well be Game of Thrones box sets…
Tell us a secret.
I was the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Ealing Southall in the 1987 general election. I lost, but I did reduce Labour’s majority by a third. I was known to the other Conservative candidates as the one who ‘argued with Maggie Thatcher’. The story is that, at a conference shortly before the election, we were all being wheeled in one at a time for a thirty second photo-op to go in our election leaflets. The big topic at the time was massive rises in property taxes (‘rates’) by Labour councils. As I was introduced she said: ‘Ah, the rates in Ealing have gone up 87%, haven’t they.’ ‘Er, 83%, prime minister.’ Smile, flash, click. She fixed me with that glare, and I left…
Mike Truman is the immediate former editor of Taxation magazine
