Cross-border protection of vulnerable adults in Europe under discussion

Emily Deane TEPSTEP took part in the EC-HCCH Joint Conference on the Cross-Border Protection of Vulnerable Adults last week in Brussels, to discuss the ratification of the Hague Convention of 13 January 2000 on the International Protection of Adults (the Hague Convention) at EU and global level and the possible future EU legislative initiatives in this field.

The event, organised jointly by the European Commission and The Hague Conference on Private International Law, brought together legal practitioners, judges, academics and government officials who deal practically with the challenges associated with the cross-border protection of vulnerable adults in Europe and beyond.

STEP’s EU cross-border expert Richard Frimston TEP joined panellists to discuss the need for an international and regional legal framework for the cross-border protection of vulnerable adults from the perspective of organisations providing services and/or protection. Richard was accompanied by representatives from Dementia Alliance and Alzheimer’s Disease International, AGE Platform Europe, CEOs in global banking and the President of the International Union of Notaries (UINL).

Richard is the coordinator of the Protection of Adults in International Situations Project Team and spoke on behalf of STEP as a member of the Board and Co-Chair of the Public Policy Committee. He delivered some pertinent points on the need for a protective framework for our increasingly aged society and those living with disabilities, and their supportive loved ones, including family members and guardians, in accordance with their human rights.

He expressed concern with powers of representation which are generally not measures of protection, unless confirmed with sufficient legal process, and the manner of exercise of such powers of representation being governed by the law of the state in which they are exercised. He argued for more balance between the protection and autonomy of individuals, and called for improved methods of powers of representation to be accepted cross-border.

The conference emphasised that this work is invaluable since the Hague Convention determines which courts have the jurisdiction to take protection measures, and which law is to be applied in circumstances when a vulnerable person requires it.

Importantly it establishes a system of central authorities to cooperate with one another and locate vulnerable adults, as well as providing information on the status of vulnerable persons to other authorities. Although much work has been carried out already, more could be done to improve the quality of European law, increase practical guidance in the European legal field and enhance European legal integration.

STEP is asking members for any practical examples of when they have encountered difficulties in practice in relation to England and Wales not having ratified the Hague Convention. Please email STEP’s policy team if you have any feedback on this issue, at step@policy.org.

STEP will keep you updated on the outcome of these discussions.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

Committee draws probate fees legislation to UK parliament’s special attention

Daniel NesbittUPDATE 07/12/2018

The Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments’ full report (PDF) has now been published and includes the following conclusion:

The Committee draws the special attention of both Houses to this draft Order on the grounds that, if it is approved and made, there will be a doubt whether it is intra vires, and that it would in any event make an unexpected use of the power conferred by the enabling Act.

The Committee reached the same view regarding the government’s attempt to raise probate fees in 2017. Underlining this position, the report notes that the Ministry of Justice’s arguments did not ‘dispel the Committee’s doubts about vires expressed in its report on the 2017 Order’.

The depiction of the changes as a ‘fee’ was also challenged by the Committee, which felt the new banded system bore the characteristics of a tax. The report noted that the higher payments were disproportionate to the actual cost of the service and that the measure represented what was in effect a type of stamp duty on probate applications.

The views expressed by the Committee match the legal opinion STEP obtained from Richard Drabble QC in response to the 2017 proposals.

ORIGINAL BLOG 6/12/2018

The Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments has scrutinised the Non-Contentious Probate (Fees) Order 2018, and drawn it to parliament’s special attention.

The committee is responsible for examining the technical aspects of secondary legislation; ensuring that the drafting is correct, clear and within the powers granted by the act under which they are being made. Although it can highlight measures it believes to be of concern, the Joint Committee cannot block or amend legislation itself.

The other committee tasked with examining secondary legislation, the House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee, in the 6th Report of Session 2017–19 (PDF) has also drawn parliament’s attention to the measure, calling it a ‘stealth tax’.

The next stage for the order in the House of Lords is for it to be voted on; and as an affirmative measure it will require a majority to pass. In the House of Commons a delegated legislation committee will be convened to scrutinise the legislation.

The Joint Committee’s full report on the order, setting out its detailed views, is yet to be published but it is expected to be released tomorrow (Fri 7 Dec 2018).

STEP will continue to monitor the situation and will provide updates where appropriate.

Daniel Nesbitt, Policy Executive, STEP 

House of Lords report criticises HMRC’s treatment of taxpayers

HMRCThe House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee has found that HMRC is failing to guarantee fairness for taxpayers by failing to differentiate between users of sophisticated tax avoidance schemes and ordinary citizens who break the law through uninformed or naive actions.

In its report, The Powers of HMRC: Treating Taxpayers Fairly (PDF), the committee found that declining resources had left HMRC unable to tackle tax avoidance and evasion whilst ensuring taxpayers are treated fairly. Highlighting a number of areas where the HMRC’s conduct appeared disproportionate, the committee recommended further work take place to ensure there is sufficient oversight of the department.

The report heavily criticised the process HMRC uses to introduce new powers, noting that too often specific solutions were identified by the department before any consultation on the wider objectives. The committee recommended that HMRC listen more carefully to the views of tax and business experts during future consultations, to ensure new legislation is properly targeted.

The committee said new measures on offshore time limits should be withdrawn, pending further discussions between HMRC and tax professionals. The plans would require those with offshore elements to their tax affairs to keep records for up to 12 years to deal with HMRC questions. Any new legislation should be more proportionate and targeted than the current plans allow.

There was heavy criticism for proposed new civil information powers, which would allow HMRC to seek information from third parties without the agreement of the tax tribunal, or the relevant taxpayer. The committee said HMRC had failed to offer a convincing rationale for the change, and recommended it be withdrawn ahead of further consultation.

The committee also noted that the government has a responsibility to give HMRC sufficient funding to be fair to taxpayers. The Treasury is recommended to assess whether the department is adequately resourced as part of the 2019 Spending Review.

The next stage in the process is for the government to respond to the committee’s findings. STEP will monitor the situation and provide updates on any further developments.

Daniel Nesbitt, Policy Executive, STEP 

OTS report supports STEP’s calls for simplification

Simon HodgesThe UK Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) has published its first report of its review into inheritance tax (IHT).  The report, in which STEP is widely quoted, finds that the process for completing IHT forms is too complex and old fashioned, and that too many people are having to fill them in unnecessarily.

The OTS is undertaking this two-part review of IHT in response to the request from the Chancellor of the Exchequer in January 2018. Since the review was announced, STEP has been in regular contact with the OTS. STEP’s response to the consultation was one of more than 3,500 to be submitted to the OTS, with the overwhelming majority seemingly negative about the IHT process.

The report concentrates on the concerns and administrative issues facing the public and professional advisors when confronted with the IHT process and related forms. It includes a number of positive recommendations, such as potentially reducing or removing the requirement to submit forms for smaller or simpler estates, especially where there is no tax to pay; having standardised requirements; and automating the system by bringing it online.

STEP has long argued that the IHT system is too complex, and that any moves to simplify the process, particularly through the implementation of a digital system, will be beneficial for bereaved families.

The Chancellor will now review the OTS recommendations before deciding whether to implement or ignore them. The key recommendation from the OTS, that ‘The government should implement a fully integrated digital system for inheritance tax, ideally including the ability to complete and submit a probate application,’ will be the mostly keenly watched, not least by STEP members.

As the report notes, inheritance tax and probate are closely linked, so it is timely that the OTS recommends that HMRC and HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) liaise on streamlining the payment and probate process. As has been widely reported, legislation currently before the UK parliament would see a radical change to the probate fee system in England and Wales, and will mean an increase in fees for the vast majority of families. This approach has already been criticised in the House of Lords, and this latest OTS report further highlights the need to simplify the tax system surrounding death, rather than complicate it further.

We will keep members updated.

Simon Hodges is Director of Policy at STEP

The Informed Trustee: three months on

Julie HutchisonIt’s now three months since the launch of The Informed Trustee, STEP’s online course for charity trustees in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. With Trustees’ Week being marked across the UK, it seems like a good moment to reflect on the story so far.

The Informed Trustee course was created as a practical response to two areas of concern. A series of reported events in charities brought the judgement and/or knowledge of charity trustees into question. The lack of diversity on charity boards also became evident. While the average age of a charity trustee is 61, figures show that 8,000 boards in England and Wales had an average age as high as 75. There’s also a gender imbalance of 64:36, with male trustees predominating.

Why online?

We chose an online training programme to remove a number of barriers limiting participation. Individuals anywhere can access course content, on whatever device is convenient for them, at whatever time of day. As the course is on-demand, attendees can dip in and out, approaching the course modules in whatever order they wish, over a 12-month period. We’re confident that this will broaden participation in trusteeship, by enabling trustees to fit their study around work and family commitments.

UK-wide

To ensure a truly UK-wide course, we sourced expert practitioners in charity law and finance from Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England, to ensure both quality and equality of provision for candidates across the jurisdictions.

We’re delighted to see that over 50 individuals are taking the online course, and that 64 per cent are women, a reversal of the usual figures in England and Wales as detailed in the 2017 Taken on Trust report (PDF). In addition, several candidates are in their 30s.

We’ve also seen group enquiries from charities that are considering The Informed Trustee course for their whole board, or for new trustees as part of their induction. I look forward seeing how take-up continues to expand over its first year, contributing to the development of charity trustees, which in turn will support charities in continuing to deliver confidently for their beneficiaries.

Julie Hutchison TEPFounding Editor, The Informed Trustee

Government changes E&W probate procedure without consultation

Emily Deane TEP

This Blog was updated on 26/11/2018 – for latest developments, please see the update at the end of the article below.

The government has announced amendments to the procedure for applying for probate in England and Wales, with less than a month’s notice. The Statutory Instrument (The Non-Contentious Probate (Amendment) Rules 2018) will come into force on 27 November 2018.

The Rules were laid as a negative instrument, meaning they don’t need the approval of Parliament and have already been signed into law by the relevant Minister. The instrument can be annulled by Parliament before implementation, but this is rare.

In brief the amended rules:

  1. allow personal online applications for probate to be made by an unrepresented applicant;
  1. enable all applications for probate to be verified by a statement of truth (instead of an oath) and without the will having to be marked (by the applicant, solicitor or probate practitioner);
  1. extend time limits in the caveat process, which give the person registering the caveat notice of any application for probate;
  1. allow caveat applications and standing searches (which give notice of grants being issued) to be made electronically;
  1. extend the powers of district probate registrars equivalent to those of district judges; and
  1. make further provision for the issue of directions (instructions to the parties) in relation to hearings.

The Probate Service has accepted online applications from personal applicants (individuals not represented by probate specialists) since earlier this year, with a view to making the system simpler and ‘easier to understand’.

There are concerns that the introduction of the online service may discourage individuals from using a probate specialist where it may be advisable to do so, for example where the estate is taxable, has foreign or complex components, or may be disputed.

The announcement comes at the same time as the Ministry of Justice’s proposal to increase the probate application fee with a banded fee structure depending on the value of the estate.

STEP strongly opposed this new system when it was proposed in 2016, on the basis that it is disproportionate to the service provided by the probate court. It is effectively a new tax on bereaved families. The government intends to introduce this measure without any proper debate via Statutory Instrument (see STEP blog: The death tax returns).

STEP will continue to follow developments in this area.

UPDATE 26/11/2018

HMCTS has advised that they will shortly provide further information with regard to the template of the statement of truth, but at present it is their intention only to make small changes to the current oath format to ensure that it fits with the new procedure and to make sure that practitioners do not need to change the format completely. They will soon provide template wording that must replace the jurat at the foot of the oath, as well as wording to account for the removal of the need to sign the will.

HMTCS have also provided guidance on the changes to the way caveat applications can be submitted. This is as follows.

Please note the following changes to Rule 44 regarding caveats:

  • Rules 44(2) (b) and 44 (3) (a) and (b): Caveats can now be entered and extended via email as well as post. If the caveat is to be entered electronically, the caveat form should be emailed to the DPR solicitors enquiries address. The email attaching the caveat form should ask for the fee to be taken from your PBA account. The fee must be paid before the caveat is entered/extended and currently there is no provision to pay a fee electronically other than by use of a PBA account. The caveat should be in the prescribed form i.e. form 3 (precedent form number 41 in Tristram & Cootes Probate Practice, 31st Edition). Caveats received after 4pm will be entered the following day.
  • Rules 44(6),(10) and (12): The period for entering an appearance/summons for directions following a warning to a caveat is now 14 days (calendar days including weekends and Bank Holidays).
  • Rule 44(13): District Probate Registrars can now deal with all summons to discontinue caveats following an appearance – whether by consent or not. The summons should be sent to the registry where the grant application is pending and if there is no application pending to the registry where the caveat was entered.
  • Rule 44(14): District Probate Registrars can now deal with applications to enter a further caveat entered by or on behalf of any caveator whose caveat is either in force or has ceased to have effect under R44(7) or (12) and under R45(4) and R46(3). These applications should be sent to the registry where the caveat was entered.
  • R45(3) and R46(3): Registrars can now deal with applications under these rules.
  • R43: Standing Searches can now be entered and extended via email as well as post. If the Standing Search is to be entered electronically, form PA1s should be emailed to the DPR with confirmation that the fee is to be taken by PBA. The fee must be paid before the Standing Search is entered/extended and currently there is no provision to pay a fee electronically other than by use of a PBA account.

In addition, please note that caveats received after 4pm will be deemed as having been received on the following day.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

The new gatekeepers of the financial system

Houses of Parliament, London

Update: STEP News 1 Nov: UK revises anti-organised crime strategy to target professional ‘facilitators’

Original blog:

Ben Wallace MP, UK Minister of State for Security at the Home Office, has called for more to be done to make lawyers and accountants who facilitate money laundering recognise their responsibilities.

As part of a House of Commons Treasury Committee evidence session (pdf) on Economic Crime, Simon Clarke MP asked whether lawyers and accountants were failing to appreciate the seriousness of money laundering. He noted that this may be because they haven’t been faced with the same level of fines as the banking sector has been.

In response Wallace said: ‘I absolutely agree with the point that the facilitators have not had the same focus on them as they should have done. They have a responsibility that they need to live up to and I would like to see them being put under more pressure to comply.’

These words mirror recent moves from the international community towards viewing practitioners such as lawyers and accountants as the new gatekeepers of the financial sector and an integral part of combatting money laundering. Publications such as the OECD’s Model Mandatory Disclosure Rules place a responsibility on advisors to report schemes that may have the effect of circumventing the Common Reporting Standard. The EU’s DAC6 (pdf) put similar requirements on intermediaries who design or promote tax-planning schemes.

Underlining the discussion in the same Treasury Committee session, Robert Buckland MP, the Solicitor General, called the creation of a new corporate criminal offence of failing to prevent economic crime a ‘very important priority’ for him.

Perhaps summing up the changing approach towards lawyers and accountants, Wallace said the following after he was asked if there should be more of a focus on the accountancy world when it came to enabling economic crime: ‘In this half of the year, my message to the facilitators is this: we have had a lot of focus on banks; my investigators are going to be focusing on you.’

STEP will continue to monitor relevant developments both in jurisdictions and with international bodies, as well as providing updates where appropriate.

Daniel Nesbitt, Policy Executive, STEP 

 

How will the UK budget affect STEP members?

Budget red boxUK Chancellor Philip Hammond delivered the final budget before the UK leaves the EU yesterday. Here are some of the key measures that may affect STEP members.

Individuals

Income tax: the personal allowance threshold, the rate at which people start paying income tax at 20 per cent, is to rise from GBP11,850 to GBP12,500 in April 2019. The higher rate income tax threshold, the point at which people start paying tax at 40 per cent, is to rise from GBP46,350 to GBP50,000 in April. Subsequently, the two rates will rise in line with inflation.

Entrepreneurs’ relief: changes to the qualifying terms. Disposals of shares only qualify where the shares entitle the holder to 5 per cent of any dividends and 5 per cent of assets on a winding up. In addition, for disposals after 6 April 2019, assets will need to have been held for a period of two years (rather than one year).

Principal private residence relief: the period of deemed occupation at the end of a period of ownership is being reduced from 18 months to nine months with a withdrawal of the rental relief element in all circumstances, except where the owner co-occupies with the tenant. The principle that the relief should apply to all properties was reaffirmed.

Capital gains tax: lettings relief is to be limited to where the owner is in shared accommodation.

Charities

Small trading tax exemptions for charities: raising the exemption upper limits from GBP5,000 and GBP50,000 to GBP8,000 and GBP80,000 respectively.

Gift aid donor benefits: simplifying the limits on benefits that charities can give to their donors to acknowledge donations.

Gift aid small donations scheme: increasing the small donations limit using cash or contactless payments from GBP20 to GBP30.

Retail gift aid scheme: relaxing the requirement to issue annual letters.  Charities will now only need to issue letters once every three years, rather than every year where a donor’s total donations in a given year are less than GBP20.

Trusts

The budget Red Book referred to the government’s trusts consultation, but the consultation date has not yet been confirmed:

3.15 Trusts consultation – As announced at Autumn Budget 2017, the government will publish a consultation on the taxation of trusts, to make the taxation of trusts simpler,
fairer and more transparent.

STEP has a trust consultation working group in place to review the consultation document as soon as it is published.

Companies

Individuals providing services via personal companies: the provisions that have applied in the public sector since April 2017 are being extended to private companies from April 2020. These provisions impose a duty on the ’engaging’ company to operate PAYE on amounts paid to the service company. These provisions will only be applied to large and medium-sized businesses.

STEP will continue to monitor the progress of the budget proposals and keep members updated.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

Addressing mental health in the workplace

10 oct 18 speakersSTEP marked World Mental Health Day on 10 October with The Capacity Conversation: Best Practice, an event hosted by the Employer Partnership team and the Mental Capacity Special Interest Group in London.

Simon Hardy TEP of Kingsley Napley explained that clients need to plan for loss of capacity, but many have not done so. While the UK has 12 million over-65s, and an estimated 850,000 dementia suffers, little more than 3 million LPAs and EPAs have been registered. When assessing someone’s capacity, the best way is to let them talk, he said, making sure that you find out their wishes, while showing that you care and are compassionate.

Laura Brayston and Claire Tomkins of Freeths, one of STEP’s Platinum Employer Partners, discussed their firm’s holistic approach to mental health at work. Freeths has instigated a top-down approach, with senior managers, who are supplied with e-learning resources, supporting initiatives to care for staff in an open and inclusive environment. The staff feel invested in, and cared about by their employer, they value mental health resources and support groups, and also appreciate treats such as snacks and drinks on Fridays.

Dan Walshe of the charity, Rethink Mental Illness, observed that mental health includes emotional, psychological and social wellbeing. It affects how we think, feel and act, and like physical health, can change over time. With an estimated one in four people affected, mental health costs employers up to GBP42 billion a year. Presenteeism (working while unwell and not fully functioning) costs from GBP18-26 billion a year, with absenteeism and staff turnover each costing GBP8 billion.

Six key recommendations for employers from Rethink Mental Illness:

  1. Produce, implement and communicate a mental health at work plan;
  2. Develop mental health awareness among employees;
  3. Encourage open conversations about mental health and the support available to those struggling;
  4. Provide good working conditions for employees;
  5. Promote effective people management; and
  6. Routinely monitor employee mental health and wellbeing.

Resources from Rethink Mental Illness:

To find out how other organisations are tackling mental health in the workplace read our STEP Journal article, Thriving at Work (pdf).

 

Laura Keith, Programme Manager – Employer Partnerships, STEP

Do UK money laundering regs extend to trusts in other jurisdictions?

departure board europeanSTEP’s Isle of Man branch has flagged potential issues raised by the UK Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/692) (the Regulations) which give effect to the requirement of the EU Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive to have a central register of trusts, and reporting obligations on trustees.

The branch has queried whether the Regulations (Part 5, the trusts register) only apply to persons acting in the course of a business carried on by them in the UK (Regulation 8(1)). If this is the case, then Part 5 would not apply to trustees in the Isle of Man and elsewhere outside the UK.

As the Regulations are not part of the domestic law in jurisdictions outside the UK, it is unclear whether trustees in these jurisdictions have a ‘legal obligation’ to comply with Regulation 45. If there is a legal obligation for them to report, then conflicting data-protection issues may be generated under the domestic law.

In addition, the Regulations contain sanctions (fines and imprisonment) for non-compliance that HMRC, which manages the UK’s central register of trusts, may be able to enforce against trustees who do not comply.

STEP has raised these ambiguous points with HM Treasury (HMT), which laid the relevant Regulations, in order to gain some clarity. HMT has confirmed that its interpretation is that the definition of ‘non-UK trust’ within Part 5 of the Regulations extends to all express trusts that receive income from a source in the UK, or have assets in the UK on which they are liable to pay a relevant UK tax, regardless of whether they are established outside of the UK.

In these circumstances, HMT asserts that the trustees will indeed be required to comply with the record-keeping and, where relevant, registration requirements within Part 5 of the Regulations.

STEP will keep members informed on any further developments.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel