TAC0068

Written evidence submitted by the CBI

1.    Introduction

1.1   The Treasury Select Committee (TSC) call for evidence on tax reform after the Coronavirus pandemic was published on 17 July 2020, with a response deadline of 8 September 2020.

 

1.2   The CBI welcomes this call for evidence and the opportunity to input into the consideration of post-pandemic tax reform. The CBI is the UK’s leading business organisation, speaking for some 190,000 businesses that together employ around a third of the private sector workforce. With offices across the UK as well as representation in Brussels, Washington, Beijing, and Delhi, the CBI communicates the British business voice around the world.

2.    Opening remarks

2.1   It is vital that, overall, any tax reform has clear and evidence-based policy objectives, is subject to full consultation with affected parties and that consultation feedback is given meaningful weight in the governmental processes for designing and implementing any reforms. It is important also that reforms are kept under review, to ensure that they are providing value for money and meeting their clear objectives or if not, the reasons for this.

 

2.2   Therefore, our overall message is that tax reform in the UK in many areas is sorely needed, but that any such reforms should be done with a view to well-informed policy objectives and should contribute towards making the tax system simpler, clearer, more stable and thus ultimately, fairer for all taxpayers.

 

2.3   We understand that the TSC wish to seek views on a broad range of substantial topics, to better inform Parliament’s approach to considering post-pandemic tax reform. Due to the breadth of the questions and the request from the TSC to keep responses concise, we have not answered below all the questions asked, but have focused on those most relevant to our members.

3.    Key points (summary)

3.1   Summarised here are the key points in respect of this submission:

  1. There are many pressures on the UK tax system currently, including those on business rates, the taxation of work, the digitalisation of the economy, the overall tax environment (looking beyond headline CT rates) and the need for sustainable investment, amongst many others.
  2. The time is right for reform, but this should happen over sensible timescales. It is vital that all reforms are fully considered and carefully designed, with clear policy aims.
  3. Full and meaningful consultation on reforms with all interested stakeholders must be a key part of the reform process.
  4. CBI proposes that a comprehensive UK tax reform roadmap is created and published. It should be designed toward a long-term time horizon and kept under constant review.
  5. Internationally, Government must continue to work for multilateral agreement on the reform of the international tax system, to avoid proliferation of unilateral regimes.

4.    Questions

 

4.1 What are the major long-term pressures on the tax system in the UK, including those arising from changes in working practices, demographics, the environment and other factors? How are these affecting the efficiency of the tax base and the overall level of demand for public services?

4.1.1         The pressures that existed in the tax system pre-COVID still exist in a post-COVID world and indeed, have not much changed. In some cases, these pressures may be accelerated by the impact of the pandemic, such as business rates, although the long-term implications for the economy, its structure and consumer habits are currently unclear.

 

4.1.2         It may be that individuals increase remote working, or consumers reduce physical retail. The CBI’s July surveys found that 45% of businesses considered 70% or less of their office space was essential because of continuing social distancing requirements and the proven ability to work remotely. There are also opportunities such as new products and services that may now grow such as new digital services, generating government tax revenues for the future. Firms have also accelerated digitalisation plans which could increase productivity, growth and ultimately tax revenues. Therefore, in our view the surest way to grow tax revenues sustainably is to create an environment in which business can thrive.

 

4.1.3         Taxes paid by business represented roughly 27% of government revenues in tax year 2018/19[1], a substantial figure and one which, in the pre-pandemic environment, was increasing.

 

4.1.4         Nonetheless, there are long-term pressures on business taxation: the business rates burden, the taxation of work, the digitalisation of the economy (and how to ensure coherence across borders), the overall tax environment (looking beyond headline CT rates) and the vitally important task of ensuring our tax system encourages sustainable investment. All of these are pressures folded within the context of Brexit, which is likely to place further strain on the economy in the medium-term.

 

4.1.5         Drawing out some of these themes in more detail:

  1. As the CBI has noted previously, the business rates system as currently designed is unsustainable in the long term and requires a significant rethink[2]. We therefore welcome the current business rates call for evidence[3], which we shall be responding to.
  2. Many commentators have suggested that working practices and patterns may change in many industries, as a result of the pandemic. Whilst it is currently too soon to say for certain what the extent of this change may be, anecdotal feedback from our members indicates that already, many employees are considering remote working on a more regular basis. What might this mean for the tax system, in particular the international tax system, if many more people were to work from anywhere (and therefore what are the implications for the structure of both individual and corporate taxation)? These are long-term, potentially fundamental changes, which require consideration now.
  3. In terms of the overall tax environment, it was clear before the pandemic that the cumulative burden of tax and regulation on business was high[4] and that business investment lagged behind our peers[5]. CBI consider that this issue is even more salient post-pandemic, as tackling this cumulative burden will provide the environment for business to grow, provide new employment opportunities and of course, increase tax revenues as the economy grows accordingly.
  4. On sustainability, it is clear that urgent action is needed on issues such as the climate crisis. CBI and its members support efforts towards green recovery and investment. Where taxes are used as a tool, they should have clear policy aims and be designed in consultation with business to ensure they meet those aims. They should be monitored on an ongoing basis after implementation, to understand progress against their aims and therefore whether any reforms are necessary, in particular to keep up with technological change. A closer review of both Structures & Buildings Allowance and Capital Allowances more generally in this regard may be useful, to understand where these reliefs might be better targeted to stimulate greater business investment.
  5. Also on the green agenda, the Government should also commit to conduct a review into the taxation of road fuels to support the transition to low carbon transport.

 

 

4.2 What more can the UK do to protect its tax base from erosion as a result of globalisation and technological change?

4.2.1        Multilateral agreement on taxation of corporate profits

4.2.1.1    We are clear that one particular and vitally important thing the UK can do to protect its tax base from future erosion is to support and drive efforts to agree a new multilateral system for international taxation of business profits. The current proliferation of unilateral Digital Services Taxes (“DSTs”) is potentially administratively costly for business and HMRC, whilst also being uncompetitive for those countries which have adopted them, including the UK.

 

4.2.1.2    Instead, a clear and consistent multilateral agreement on how and where multinational enterprises profits are taxed will result in fewer disputes and a less patchy framework, thus minimising opportunities for BEPS activities to take place. Therefore, it is of great concern that the OECD work appears to continue to suffer from significant political disagreement and technical problems, whilst also potentially handing a competitive advantage to the USA, who will not, as it stands, adopt Pillar 2. Resolving these issues in a way that results in both a reasonable compliance burden and a fair distribution of tax revenues will be crucial to the UK’s long-term tax framework.

 

4.3 What further impacts will the coronavirus pandemic have on our tax base?

4.3.1        Further short/medium-term impacts from the pandemic

4.3.1.1    Whilst the economic picture remains highly uncertain, in the short-term it is reasonable to anticipate some or all of the following to persist for some time after the immediate pandemic crisis phase:

  1. Reduced corporate profits, particularly (but not only) in those sectors hardest hit by the necessary pandemic-related public health measures (such as hospitality, for example).
  2. Reduced labour income and increased unemployment, particularly should there be significant business failures once government support is withdrawn, or where some jobs simply cease to exist due to pandemic-accelerated trends towards new business models.
  3. Reduced consumer spending, linked to many factors including potentially job insecurity, lack of available options and lower incomes, amongst others.

 

4.3.1.2    Any of these events alone would reduce tax receipts – income tax, NICs, VAT and corporate taxes (which together represented 75% of total tax revenues in 2019/20[6]) can all be expected to be (possibly substantially) reduced[7], with benefits payments rising as a result of increased unemployment. Further, we might see increasing changes to city centres if large office spaces become unused, with the knock-on impact to surrounding businesses, property prices and associated business rates revenues.

 

4.3.1.3    However, it is to be expected that employment, consumer spending and business profits will eventually return, although the overall speed and extent of this return depends on the pattern and extent of the economic recovery. In turn, the pattern and extent of the recovery is dependent, in many respects, on the choices made by government regarding pandemic-related support schemes. As CBI has recently made public[8], we consider that the Government should introduce a “Jobs Support Scheme” as a new, more targeted alternative to the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS), to ensure the positive impacts of CJRS are not squandered when it is wound down in October.

 

4.3.1.4    Additionally, as CBI recently noted in a recent submission to HM Treasury, it will be crucial to manage the unwinding of the pandemic-related tax deferrals so as to give businesses a clear shot at recovery and growth. This might include grouping together deferrals into a single repayment plan and additionally, giving HMRC a mandate for much more flexibility with Time To Pay arrangements. It should also include consideration of further deferrals of VAT payments. Whilst this will result in government deferring receipt of some taxes, we would also note that this is a timing issue only and will help to ensure that the welcome pandemic-related support the government has advanced to business has not been wasted, as it would be if businesses were to fail solely due to pandemic-related tax debt.

 

4.3.1.5    Despite this challenging backdrop, ONS data is already showing stronger than expected tax receipts for June, for example[9]. Therefore the above impacts may be somewhat temporary, yet nonetheless significant[10], requiring government to provide the right support at the right time as the economy reopens, beyond the crisis measures taken so far. Such support may take the form of additional help to business, or the provision of greater and more flexible funding for workplace training, to reskill those who will perhaps find that their pre-pandemic jobs will not return.

4.3.2        Long-term impacts

4.3.2.1    The government’s swift action at the outset of the pandemic to support the economy was very welcome and we believe, will help to limit any long-term scarring to the economy. Nonetheless, to withdraw that support before the economy is fully able to restart and revive[11] itself would be to risk avoidable long-term economic scarring and permanently lower tax receipts as a result; it would be to waste the money already spent. Government therefore should consider this in both near- and long-term strategy.

 

4.3.2.2    Otherwise, ways of working and doing business are changing and have been for some time. Some consider that this has been brought into focus by the pandemic[12]. Some analysis of these changes illustrates the possible scale of the issue – for example, the OECD estimate that 14% of current jobs could disappear due to automation in the next 15-20 years, with another 32% of jobs very likely to experience radical change as individual tasks are automated[13].

 

4.3.2.3    This raises new questions. How, for example, should the tax system deal with remote working in the future – not just from home (which over 40% of the UK workforce did in May 2020[14]), but possibly from a home in another country? Of course, such trends also have potentially significant implications for the commercial property market, with knock-on effects for taxes such as business rates, amongst others.

 

4.3.2.4    On the business side, we normally think of companies such as Facebook, Google and Amazon when we think of digital businesses. However, given predictions that the pandemic has accelerated the ‘digitalisation’ of many businesses, including smaller and previously more traditional ones, the tax system needs to be prepared for this. How will the tax system address this, or more generally, new business models arising from the pandemic? Built-in flexibility is important in this regard, so that the system can respond with agility to the pace of change.

 

4.3.2.5    These are crucial questions – one only needs to observe the difficulties encountered in reforming the international tax system to see that early thinking on these issues is vital, to avoid further problems in the future. It is likely that further multilateral efforts will be needed as technological change pushes forward. Yet, as noted above, this change also presents real opportunities for the UK economy and our tax system must be ready to both help to foster these opportunities, and to capture the additional tax revenue that such positive economic activity creates – the balance in this respect is of great importance.

 

4.4 Do these pressures need to be met with tax reform, and if so, is this the right time for reform?

4.4.1         Many of these pressures do need to be met with tax reform; but as above, any reform must be considered, fully consulted on and have clear policy objectives, to avoid adding complexity to an already complex tax code.

 

4.4.2         Now is, in our view, absolutely the right time for reform, given the pandemic has created an unprecedented economic environment. Reforms and simplifications that may previously have seemed too big (for example, the reform of business rates referenced above) may now be politically feasible.

 

4.4.3         Nonetheless, all reforms should be designed to be stable and of course, should not unnecessarily increase the complexity of the system. Tax reforms, big or small, always create costs for businesses, but these costs are more easily absorbed when the reforms are clear, focused and designed to be stable for a period of time longer than a single parliament.

 

4.4.4         By contrast, constant small-scale reform (‘tweaking’) is both inefficient for business and makes it difficult for government to keep sight of the ultimate goals for the overall system. Indeed, CBI has previously highlighted the significant need for simplicity to be a core tenet of tax policy making[15].

 

4.4.5         CBI therefore proposes that a sensible exercise would be to set out a whole tax system roadmap (as has previously been done with corporate tax) to guide the way for successive governments. This need not be a restrictive document, but could set out the broad path whilst allowing flexibility to respond to unexpected economic events. Whilst this would be a significant piece of work to produce, we believe that it is thoroughly worthwhile and indeed, much literature already exists to light the way, for example, CBI’s previous publication on the tax policy-making cycle[16], independent reports such as the Mirrlees Review[17] and indeed, the 2010 coalition government’s own discussion document ‘Tax policy making: a new approach’[18] – a document including suggestions which remain as relevant today as they were in 2010.

 

4.4.6         This forward planning would give businesses additional clarity and certainty over what to expect in the future, which can help reduce the cost of responding to reform and indeed, allow business to focus on investment and growth over the long-term.

 

4.5 Which areas of the tax system are most in need of reform, and which are best left alone?

4.5.1         Many areas of the tax system are in need of reform and it would be impractical to list them all in a response such as this. Further, CBI continues to make representations to HM Treasury and HMRC both in working groups and in our fiscal event submissions regarding key areas that business considers are ripe for reform.

 

4.5.2         Indeed, CBI have been campaigning for some time on many issues which remain as relevant to post-pandemic reform as they were to pre-pandemic reform. To briefly recount some of these:

  1. International tax reform – making the international tax system fit for the new economy. As referenced above, this includes reaching sensible multi-lateral agreement on reforms, rather than unilateral and disjointed action.
  2. Business rates reform – as referenced above, it is vital that the business rates system is updated and made fit for the 21st century to enable businesses across the economy to invest and grow.
  3. R&D Tax Credits – the recent consultation on the scope of these credits is welcome, however in our view there is further to go. Government has been clear that it wants the UK to attract far more R&D investment than it currently does and in particular this will be crucial as the UK competes with other countries post-Brexit. Widening the scope even beyond the current consultation proposals, making the tax credit more generous and reviewing how easily accessible it is, should all be part of this bigger reform.
  4. Cumulative burden – as above, reviewing the burden of business tax and regulation as a whole will be vital in ensuring the UK, post-pandemic and post-Brexit, is the best place to start and grow a business. This is the best path to unlock even greater contributions by business to economic growth, jobs and ultimately as a result, tax receipts.

4.5.3         More widely, if the Committee wishes for further overview of potential and significant tax reform, the outputs of groups such as such as the Mirrlees Review[19] and the Office for Tax Simplification would also be an excellent place to start. The fact that many of the recommendations of the Mirrlees Review, published almost a decade ago, remain relevant today, tells us much about the continuing need for serious and sensible reforms to address long standing issues.

 

4.5.4         These are indeed just a selection of the issues, but nonetheless illustrate the significant review and reform that is needed to the UK tax system in the future.

 

4.6 What is the role of tax reliefs in rebuilding the economy and promoting economic growth and efficiency? Does the current regime of tax reliefs perform this role well?

4.6.1         Properly targeted and simple to access tax reliefs are a key tool of government for promoting economic activity and driving behaviours. If designed effectively, tax reliefs can be an important lever for governments to deliver national economic policies. The UK’s R&D tax credits system is an example of this. Providing relief to profitable as well as loss-making businesses, it can help to encourage investment activity that may not have otherwise taken place[20].

 

4.6.2         As with all elements of the UK’s business tax system, international competitiveness is crucial. Policies can encourage greater foreign direct investment, supporting domestic businesses and job creation - and this isn’t an either/or choice, as inward investment can have knock-on effects, creating clustering of domestic and foreign-owned businesses.

 

4.6.3         However, on many occasions tax reliefs have been introduced which either lack clear policy objectives, are not designed to fully meet their policy objectives, or are difficult to access. Indeed, the OTS has previously considered these issues in its tax reliefs report, issued in 2011[21]. It will therefore be sensible to consider whether a fresh tax reliefs review, given the passage of time, would be a useful exercise.

 

4.6.4         Additionally, the fact that HMRC possess neither the tools nor data to effectively monitor many of the plethora of tax reliefs in existence in the UK tax system[22] means that evaluating the value for money of many tax reliefs is effectively impossible. Thus, an assessment of which reliefs are useful and which are not is very challenging indeed.

 

4.6.5         Therefore, whilst tax reliefs certainly have a role to play in incentivising business to invest and grow post-pandemic, it is vital that any new reliefs introduced are properly consulted upon and have clear policy objectives, whilst existing reliefs should be reviewed to understand which need reform, and which should be abolished.

 

4.6.6         As such, we cannot say that the current system of reliefs performs well on all counts, although some specific reliefs (e.g. R&D relief) are successful and should be expanded to encourage even more innovation and growth in the UK economy.

 

4.7 Is there a role for windfall taxes in the post coronavirus world?

4.7.1         It is vital post-pandemic that business is able to invest and grow, to play its part in getting the UK back on the road to growth.

 

4.7.2         Any windfall tax on businesses now would, in our view, be highly counter-productive. Windfall taxes very rarely meet the test of a stable policy environment and need to be judged very carefully against the long-term disincentive they can have on foreign direct investment. By their very nature, windfall taxes omit much of the vital consultation required to make tax policies work effectively that is discussed elsewhere in this document. It is also often politically difficult for governments to abolish taxes once they are in situ, e.g. oil and gas CT surcharge, Bank Levy and indeed (looking historically) even income tax – all were originally intended as temporary measures, but are yet to be repealed.

 

4.7.3         Not only would a windfall tax deprive businesses of the cash they would otherwise use to invest in people and capital, it would also be a blunt instrument which would most probably do little to support the thousands of businesses that remain in difficulty – particularly if the funds generated from it are used solely for paying down debt. Not only that, but a windfall tax coupled with the significant disruption of Brexit may simply be more than many businesses are currently able to bear.

 

4.7.4         To generate the rising tax revenues that government will require in the future, what is needed is sustainable growth that is underpinned by good tax policy, ensuring that the government benefits from a reasonable proportion of that economic growth, in order to spend and invest in public service provision.

 

4.7.5         Therefore in summary, taxing away the profits of companies, purely on the basis that they were made during the pandemic, would appear to run directly contrary to the idea that governments want companies to be on a stable footing and less reliant on government support in the near future.

 

4.8 What is the best way to tackle tax reform, including what changes might be needed at HMRC to support implementation, and how should the Government consult with stakeholders and parliament?

4.8.1         Tax reform is and will continue to be a necessary process – the tax system must move with the economy. As above, CBI considers that the first and most vital step in this process should be a comprehensive roadmap to structure the reforms around, which will both set out a clear direction of travel for the UK tax system as a whole, allowing sufficient flexibility for responses to future crises, but without compromising the overall clarity of vision. Such a strategy gives businesses predictability over what structural changes they are likely to face.

 

4.8.2         Some tweaks between years are inevitable but a clear plan of the structural challenges each parliament is likely to tackle will be of great benefit to business, Parliament and the general public. Of course, this strategy should be kept under regular review and where any changes are necessary, these should be made after transparent deliberation and once clear rationale for the changes have been published. Pulling ‘rabbits out of the hat’ must become firmly a thing of the past.

 

4.8.3         Ideally, tax reform of any shape should be a process which commences a substantial time prior to any legislation being drafted. It is crucial that the problem to be addressed is clearly scoped and the intended policy outcomes are clearly defined. Reforms must be grounded in the evidence (including costings) to support them and reviewed or abolished if the evidence for them is scant, or doesn’t exist. Reforms should be considered such that they will be designed to last in a stable form for some time, rather than a single electoral cycle (as may be the case with solely politically-driven reform). They must also be carefully considered for their simplicity, both internally to the reform and in the context of the simplicity of the wider tax system.

 

4.8.4         It is then vital that full and frank consultation with all affected taxpayers and stakeholders is undertaken, with the feedback received during this process being given appropriate weight in the government decision making processes. In recent times, reforms have on many occasions charged ahead despite significant business and taxpayer concern (consider for example, the recent IR35 off-payroll working reforms). Consultation should be undertaken early – well before the desired implementation date – and in some cases perhaps in more than a single round. Both written consultations and roundtable discussions are, in our view, the best ways to approach stakeholders.

 

4.8.5         Any reforms should take a ‘whole system’ approach. It is often inefficient and in some cases meaningless to ‘tinker’ with discrete parts of discrete taxes without considering the effects across the system as a whole; this was a core tenet of the Mirrlees Review approach, for example[23].

 

4.8.6         Parliament should be involved throughout the debates on any proposed reform, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the significance of the reform. Taxes take their legitimacy from the fact that they are levied following due democratic process – to try to push forward significant tax reforms without this open debate is to risk undermining this legitimacy. In this respect, it is of much concern that in some recent cases (e.g. the UK Digital Services Tax) it has been seen as appropriate to create broad and vague law, on the basis that the details can be implanted to this law via HMRC Guidance. Plainly, levying tax in this way is not appropriate, as HMRC Guidance has no force of law and is not scrutinised by Parliament in the same manner as a statute.

 

4.8.7         In terms of changes at HMRC, firstly it is vital that HMRC are properly resourced to meet these challenges. In the short-term this will of course include meeting the significant administrative burdens which may be created by Brexit and ongoing Coronavirus-related work. Further, feedback from our members suggests that a focus on building positive working relationships with business is key.

 

4.8.8         As we noted in our report ‘In Need of a Reset’, the business community has long recognised HMRC as a world-class, well-respected tax authority. This has been driven by its reputation for integrity and reliability, meaning business can trust that their tax affairs are being treated with confidence and in a fair manner. Additionally since that report, HMRC have in our view displayed great agility and competence in implementing the CJRS so quickly in what was (and is) a highly pressurised environment. As we note above, this scheme had real positive impacts at a time of crisis.

 

4.8.9         Nevertheless, HMRC’s reputation with business has come under some pressure in recent years, and the veil of fog that seems to have appeared for some businesses means that, for the UK to remain open for business and to retain its reputation as a well administered tax system, HMRC now needs to press the reset button on the commitment to co-operative compliance[24].

 

4.8.10      On this basis, for example, CBI has recently engaged with HMRC regarding the Customer Compliance Manager (CCM) handover process, as this was creating large and unnecessary costs for business due to the lack of co-ordination at HMRC and a lack of consistency in CCM approach. We are pleased to report that thus far, these conversations have been productive and we are hopeful they will continue to be so. Certainly, it is our experience that many within HMRC do recognise the need to build sensible and appropriate relationships with business. However, translating that understanding into whole-organisation culture is a sizeable task and requires HMRC to be provided with the resources and mandate to do so, on a consistent basis – for example by ensuring funding is allocated not just for combatting evasion and avoidance, which is clearly important, but also just as importantly to recruiting, training and retaining staff who are allocated to helping taxpayers to navigate the system successfully.

 

4.8.11      Finally, Making Tax Digital (MTD) also holds much potential in helping taxpayers to interact with HMRC in a more efficient manner, provided it is designed with proper consultation with business at each stage. It is crucial that the technology is designed and the implementation project managed by appropriate expertise, alongside realistic and public timelines allowing for proper consultation. In this respect the tax administration strategy recently released by HMRC was a welcome step[25]. All of this requires ongoing resources for HMRC to invest in people and technology. Additionally, the adoption of MTD technology for many businesses will not be a simple or cheap process and therefore understanding of this is key to the project being successful.

 

4.8.12      In summary, a clear and consistent roadmap for reform which has strong political commitment, coupled with meaningful public consultation and a properly resourced HMRC, is crucial to lasting and stable tax reform in the UK.

September 2020

13 

 


[1] https://www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/articles/uk-businesses-paid-nearly-200bn-in-tax-last-year/

[2] CBI Campaign, ‘Progressive Business Rates that Work for Everyone’ <https://www.cbi.org.uk/our-campaigns/progressive-business-rates-that-work-for-everyone/>

[3] HM Treasury (2020), ‘Fundamental review of Business Rates call for evidence’, July 2020 <https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/hm-treasury-fundamental-review-of-business-rates-call-for-evidence>

[4] CBI Campaign, ‘Tackling the Rising Cost of Tax and Regulation’ <https://www.cbi.org.uk/our-campaigns/tackle-the-rising-cost-of-tax-and-regulation/>

[5] CBI Report, ‘Catching the Peloton’, August 2018 <https://www.cbi.org.uk/media/1562/catching-the-peloton.pdf>

[6] ONS (2020), Public sector finances, UK: June 2020, <https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/june2020>

[7] Ibid.

[8] Thomas, D. (2020), ‘CBI boss urges UK government to adopt new jobs support scheme’, Financial Times (5 September 2020)

[9] Ibid.

[10]ONS (2020), Coronavirus (COVID-19) roundup: Economy, business and jobs’, 13 August 2020 <https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19roundupeconomybusinessandjobs/2020-07-02#labourmarket>

[11] E.g. see The Economist (2020), The 90% economy that lockdowns will leave behind’, 30 April 2020 <https://www.economist.com/briefing/2020/04/30/the-90-economy-that-lockdowns-will-leave-behind>

[12] E.g. McKinsey & Co (2020), ‘Reimagining the office and work life after COVID-19’, 8 June 2020, <https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/reimagining-the-office-and-work-life-after-covid-19>

[13] OECD (2019), Employment Outlook 2019: The future of work

[14] ONS (2020), Business Impact of COVID-19 Survey, Wave 5: 4 May to 17 May 2020

[15] CBI Policy Briefing, ‘Tax Simplification: from Policy Inception to Implementation’, 2016 <https://www.cbi.org.uk/media/1305/tax-simplification-from-policy-inception-to-implementation.pdf>

[16] CBI Policy Briefing, Vision and process in tax policy making: key ingredients for investment’, 2015 <https://www.cbi.org.uk/media/1310/business-tax-roadmap_policy-making-paperdocx.pdf>

[17] Mirrlees, J. et al. (2010), ‘Tax by Design: The Mirrlees Review’, Oxford University Press

[18] HM Treasury & HMRC (2010), ‘Tax policy making: a new approach’, June 2010.

[19] Mirrlees, J. et al. (2010), ‘Tax by Design: The Mirrlees Review’, Oxford University Press

[20] For a more detailed look at R&D tax credits, see CBI Report ‘Untapped Investment’, August 2019, < https://www.cbi.org.uk/media/3279/untapped-investment-cbi.pdf>

[21] See for example OTS, ‘Review of tax reliefs’, March 2011, < https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/198570/ots_review_tax_reliefs_final_report.pdf>, p.19

[22] For example, House of Commons Public Accounts Committee Report, ‘Management of tax reliefs’, July 2020, <https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5801/cmselect/cmpubacc/379/37902.htm>

[23] Mirrlees, J. et al. (2010), ‘Tax by Design: The Mirrlees Review’, Oxford University Press, pp.2 & 3

[24] CBI Report, ‘In Need of a Reset’, December 2018 <https://www.cbi.org.uk/media/2326/2019-03-in-need-of-a-reset-hmrc-relationship-with-large-business.pdf>

[25] HMRC (2020), Building a trusted, modern tax administration system’, <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tax-administration-strategy/building-a-trusted-modern-tax-administration-system>, 21 July 2020