Accountability is a strong theme on this website, and after the 4 current examples I cited yesterday, the Ashcroft scandal immediately presents a 5th today.   The key question is how Ashcroft was allowed to get away for 9 years with giving a ‘clear and unequivocal assurance’ that he would be permanently resident in the UK before the end of 2000 and on that basis was given a peerage in the Lords, yet never paid UK tax on his world wide income because he was actually a non-dom for tax purposes.   Why didn’t the authorities at any time in 9 years not insist he paid full UK tax for which he was liable (a total of probably £127 millions over the period) or, when he broke his assurance, make him forfeit his peerage?

I have today put down several PQs to the Treasury (HMRC):

1  Who were the senior civil servant and the Tory whip who did a deal in March 2000 that Ashcroft need only be a ‘long-term resident’ in the UK which allowed Ashcroft to remain non-domiciled for tax purposes, thus avoiding tens of millions of pounds in UK income tax, and what Minister (if any) sanctioned this deal?

2  What is the precise legal authority for ‘long-term resident’ which indicates that the taxpayer may well leave after an extended period, and how many days per year have to be spent in the UK per year to claim this status?

3  Was Bearwood Corporate Services, the UK company owned by Ashcroft, operating as a fully-fledged company when Ashcroft’s donations of £5 millions were made to the Tory Party, or was it simply and exclusively a  vehicle to enable him to donate?

4  Will the Chancellor in his upcoming Budget end the anomaly of non-domiciliary tax status?

Bookmark to: