One minute with Dominic Lawrance, partner at Charles Russell Speechlys.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I have to admit, I make a lot of tea, which is quite time-consuming. Also, I have some very diverting matters for individual clients who are immigrating or emigrating, or creating structures to hold art or crypto, or setting up private philanthropic foundations – the kind of stuff that affluent, driven, internationally mobile people get up to.
If you could make one change to a tax, what would it be?
That’s a tough one! In the area in which I practice, there are so many ill-conceived and badly-drafted provisions that it’s hard to pick just one. Some of these operate in a perverse manner. Others don’t seem to be in English. Some are positively injurious to health. For example, anyone foolish enough to attempt to read the 2018 onward gift rules would be well-advised to take strong painkillers, pre-emptively.
Perhaps I could be allowed to say that I would like to change the way tax law is made in the UK. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that, at present, HMRC has too much influence over the making of tax law, and that the process is inadequate. Arguments from within HMRC that legislative changes are necessary are not assessed as critically as they should be, an issue that particularly affects legislation on HMRC’s investigatory powers and powers of sanction. Moreover, when new tax law is drawn up, there is no effective supervision.
In practice, there is only the most superficial review by Parliament. MPs put their faith in assurances from HMRC/the Treasury that the draft provisions are necessary and that they work, and they can hardly be blamed for that. But not infrequently, the complexity of the legislative framework and/or what the new provisions are seeking to do, combined with the lack of effective supervision, results in defects. Some provisions make no sense, and others have results that are contrary to what one can reasonably assume was intended.
What we need (although I fully appreciate that this sounds Panglossian) is a statutory minimum period for draft tax legislation to be reviewed and refined before it is presented to Parliament, and an expert, genuinely independent body to do the reviewing and improving.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
Your ignorance will always feel enormous. However, your embarrassment at all the things you don’t know will diminish over the years. Strangely, this lack of embarrassment will give other people the illusion that you are competent and knowledgeable. When you get there, enjoy the illusion, while it lasts…
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
Seghal v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 312 (TC): the first ever case on the current remittance basis legislation. It’s extraordinary that it has taken 14 years for a case on this to come along. The judgment is very hard to understand: the facts were convoluted and it seems that HMRC changed its argument numerous times, so the confused nature of the judgment is perhaps forgivable. However, I understand that the decision has been appealed. If the Upper Tribunal manages to bring some clarity to the issues, it could be groundbreaking.
You might not know this about me but...
I’m currently in training for the London Marathon, raising money for Brain Research UK. Utter torture. I’m also engrossed in The Perfect Heresy by Stephen O’Shea, a popular history account of the unbelievably brutal suppression of the Cathars in thirteenth century Languedoc. More torture, although it is a fantastic read. The horrors of the Middle Ages help to keep all modern-day tribulations and injustices in perspective!
One minute with Dominic Lawrance, partner at Charles Russell Speechlys.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I have to admit, I make a lot of tea, which is quite time-consuming. Also, I have some very diverting matters for individual clients who are immigrating or emigrating, or creating structures to hold art or crypto, or setting up private philanthropic foundations – the kind of stuff that affluent, driven, internationally mobile people get up to.
If you could make one change to a tax, what would it be?
That’s a tough one! In the area in which I practice, there are so many ill-conceived and badly-drafted provisions that it’s hard to pick just one. Some of these operate in a perverse manner. Others don’t seem to be in English. Some are positively injurious to health. For example, anyone foolish enough to attempt to read the 2018 onward gift rules would be well-advised to take strong painkillers, pre-emptively.
Perhaps I could be allowed to say that I would like to change the way tax law is made in the UK. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that, at present, HMRC has too much influence over the making of tax law, and that the process is inadequate. Arguments from within HMRC that legislative changes are necessary are not assessed as critically as they should be, an issue that particularly affects legislation on HMRC’s investigatory powers and powers of sanction. Moreover, when new tax law is drawn up, there is no effective supervision.
In practice, there is only the most superficial review by Parliament. MPs put their faith in assurances from HMRC/the Treasury that the draft provisions are necessary and that they work, and they can hardly be blamed for that. But not infrequently, the complexity of the legislative framework and/or what the new provisions are seeking to do, combined with the lack of effective supervision, results in defects. Some provisions make no sense, and others have results that are contrary to what one can reasonably assume was intended.
What we need (although I fully appreciate that this sounds Panglossian) is a statutory minimum period for draft tax legislation to be reviewed and refined before it is presented to Parliament, and an expert, genuinely independent body to do the reviewing and improving.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
Your ignorance will always feel enormous. However, your embarrassment at all the things you don’t know will diminish over the years. Strangely, this lack of embarrassment will give other people the illusion that you are competent and knowledgeable. When you get there, enjoy the illusion, while it lasts…
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
Seghal v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 312 (TC): the first ever case on the current remittance basis legislation. It’s extraordinary that it has taken 14 years for a case on this to come along. The judgment is very hard to understand: the facts were convoluted and it seems that HMRC changed its argument numerous times, so the confused nature of the judgment is perhaps forgivable. However, I understand that the decision has been appealed. If the Upper Tribunal manages to bring some clarity to the issues, it could be groundbreaking.
You might not know this about me but...
I’m currently in training for the London Marathon, raising money for Brain Research UK. Utter torture. I’m also engrossed in The Perfect Heresy by Stephen O’Shea, a popular history account of the unbelievably brutal suppression of the Cathars in thirteenth century Languedoc. More torture, although it is a fantastic read. The horrors of the Middle Ages help to keep all modern-day tribulations and injustices in perspective!
