Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Treasury minister’s wife is not a ‘tax avoidance lawyer’, says LexisNexis

printer Mail

LexisNexis has defended its employee Rachel Gauke – wife of the Exchequer Secretary, David Gauke – and its support services for tax professionals after some commentators, responding to David Gauke’s criticism of householders paying cash in return for discounts, claimed that Rachel Gauke worked as a ‘tax avoidance lawyer’.

LexisNexis, which publishes Tax Journal and other titles including Taxation and Tax Adviser – the monthly journal of the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) – is a division of Reed Elsevier. It said in a statement this morning that an item posted on the Guido Fawkes blog, and subsequent press comment, had misrepresented the role of one of its professional support lawyers.
 
The Exchequer Secretary was accused of operating ‘double standards’ after he said earlier this week that ‘getting a discount with your plumber by paying cash in hand is something that is a big cost to [HMRC] and means others have to pay more tax’. The practice was ‘morally wrong’, he said.
 
Failing to declare income is tax evasion, which is illegal. But a spokesman for Rated People, an online trade recommendation service, said that for many traders there was ‘little or no alternative’ to cash payments. Some critics have pointed out that there are non-tax reasons why cash is sometimes preferable to a payment by cheque. Rosa Prince, Online Political Editor at The Telegraph, said Gauke’s remarks had ‘caused consternation’ among many members of the public. Some commentators had focused on Gauke’s own ‘relationship with the taxman’.
 
Macfarlanes
 
‘Guido Fawkes’ noted that Gauke won the ‘Tax personality of the year’ award at last year’s LexisNexis Taxation awards. He also claimed that Gauke once ‘worked for a company that specialises in helping the wealthy avoid tax’.
 
Gauke worked for the City law firm Macfarlanes before he became an MP. Macfarlanes’ website says it is ‘rated as one of the leading tax and structuring practices in the City’. But a spokeswoman told Tax Journal today that the firm did not market aggressive tax products: ‘As a law firm we advise on the full range of corporate and commercial matters. Part of that includes advising on lawful tax structuring solutions.’
 
She pointed out that Gauke, who was with the firm between 1999 and 2005, was not actually part of the tax team – he worked as a corporate lawyer.
 
Rachel Gauke
 
Rosa Prince’s Telegraph piece continued: ‘Then there is his wife, Rachel, also a solicitor. Like her husband, Mrs Gauke is a tax expert; she currently works as an adviser to LexusNexus (sic), specialising in corporate tax law. The firm's website states that its staff “support every tax practitioner on the front line as they deal with the tax collector”. But, as callers to one radio phone-in said, everyone has their own view of which forms of tax avoidance – or “efficiency” – are “morally wrong”.’
 
Chris Jones, LexisNexis Director of Tax Markets, said today: ‘Rachel Gauke produces content for LexisPSL which is an online tool that guides lawyers through the workings of the UK tax code. She does not advise individuals or companies on how to avoid tax or reduce their tax bills.’
 
LexisNexis
 
Jones said: ‘Our publishing history has contributed to ensuring the rule of law is respected. We take this responsibility seriously. Customers of our Tolley [tax] suite of products range from high street accountants, through to multinationals and the government. Guido Fawkes, and others, failed to point out that the government receives the same tax services provided by LexisNexis as customers in the private sector. We supply a variety of publications, online content and magazines to HMRC and HM Treasury.
 
‘The content we provide helps the taxpayer, tax agents, and the tax collector comply with the law. The work of the UK tax profession enables citizens to comply with a plethora of statutory obligations. Many of our customers are high street practitioners who provide advice to those who must produce self-assessment tax forms. Without the tax information we produce, those practitioners would not be able to ensure that businesses and individuals comply with the law.’
 
Tax personality of the year
 
‘Guido Fawkes’ also noted that in May 2011 Macfarlanes welcomed Gauke’s receipt of the ‘Tax personality of the year' award at the annual LexisNexis Taxation Awards.
 
Macfarlanes partner Ashley Greenbank said at the time that Gauke’s win was ‘well deserved’. He had set out a framework for the government's initiatives to reform tax policy-making procedures, and had set up the Office for Tax Simplification (OTS).
 
Gauke was ‘generally making great strides in engaging with business and tax professionals’, Greenbank added, reflecting a generally positive welcome among tax professionals for a commitment to simplification and earlier consultation on tax reform.
 
The judging panel included Taxation Editor Mike Truman and Chris Sanger, then Chairman of the ICAEW Tax Faculty, who is Head of Tax Policy at Ernst & Young.
 
According to Gauke’s own website, the citation read: ‘The choice of winner for this award reflects the judges’ desire to recognise a significant change in the approach of government to tax policy, and the process of passing tax legislation. In particular, the recipient of the award has shown a real willingness to engage with the tax profession and develop a technical understanding of the issues which it raises with government.’
 
More recently, there was praise for Gauke’s approach from John Whiting, Tax Director of the OTS and Tax Policy Director of the CIOT. In an interview with Tax Journal, when asked who in tax he most admired, Whiting said: ‘Any and every tax practitioner who manages to keep up with the flood of change … plus a special mention for David Gauke who I think is doing a great job.’
 
But earlier this month Sanger told Tax Journal that the tax law-making process was ‘the wrong way round’. ‘I think we’ve got a real problem,’ he said. ‘When new policy is introduced, the profession only engages when we see the law and then we get lots of amendments on what that law is. If we look at the rest of government, we have white papers and green papers and we get the content right first and then we do the law.’
 
This news story was first published on 26 July 2012
EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top