The global re-shoring trend is creating new opportunities for the UK, but our report shows it has limited time to set itself up for future high quality manufacturing.
Building a tax manifesto for manufacturing
Tax Insights (previously T Magazine): future of tax
2014 tax risk and controversy survey highlights
Managing indirect tax in the digital age
FATCA: Are you ready for 1 July?
OECD provides update on the BEPS Action Plan
Tax Policy and Controversy Briefing goes online
We’ll help you navigate the global tax landscape
The business and tax landscapes have changed dramatically, and the pace and complexity of change continues to increase. Governments are tempering the need for revenue with increased competition for labor and capital. Tax authorities are adapting their enforcement strategies, focus and policies in response to the changing dynamics of business. Companies are balancing competing priorities, ensuring they maintain compliance while adding value.
We can assist you with these critical issues in today's tax environment, including:
Building a tax manifesto for manufacturing 658K, August 2014
- Midweek Tax News
A weekly update on tax matters to 26 August 2014
Midweek Tax News provides you with a succinct overview of the key tax developments that have occurred each week, to allow you to stay up-to-date on tax issues that may have an impact on your business. If you would like to discuss an article in more detail, please do speak to the relevant contact listed at the end of this issue or to your usual EY contact.
Extractive industry reporting: Conclusion of BIS consultation
The EU Accounting Directive, which was agreed in April 2013, includes a requirement for companies in the extractive industry or involved with the logging of primary forests to disclose, in a separate report on an annual basis, material payments over €100,000 made to governments in the countries in which they operate, including taxes on profits, royalties and licence fees. The disclosures are to be made both on a country-by-country and project-by-project basis.
In March 2014, the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) launched an open consultation on how the requirements of the Directive should be implemented into UK domestic legislation, and on 21 August 2014 the results of that consultation were published, including a further draft of the regulations necessary to bring the requirements into effect in the UK.
Member States are required to implement the Directive into their relevant legislation within two years of it coming into force, with a requirement that the legislation should apply to financial statements beginning on or after 1 January of the following year. This means that the Directive will be of mandatory application by 2016, with possible early adoption by some Member States. In relation to the UK, the Government has restated its commitment to the early introduction of the transparency requirement, and, following the consultation, has decided that the new reporting requirements should apply to financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2015.
Scottish devolved taxation
On 20 August 2014, the Revenue Scotland and Tax Powers (RSTP) Bill had its Stage 3 hearing before the Scottish Parliament. The motion to pass the Bill was agreed and the Bill now moves forward for Royal Assent.
The Bill establishes Revenue Scotland as the tax authority responsible for the collection and management of the Scottish land and buildings transaction tax (LBTT) and the Scottish landfill tax. These two devolved taxes have already been enacted and come into operation on 1 April 2015. However, as the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth, John Swinney, made clear in the course of the Stage 3 debate, the RSTP Bill has another purpose in laying down how Revenue Scotland will operate in the case of the Scottish Parliament becoming responsible for a wider range of taxes.
The RSTP Bill has the potential to provide major change in the way tax is approached and administered in Scotland. It will, however, be necessary to see both what taxes are ultimately regulated by the Bill and how that regulation develops in practice. It is important to note that from 1 April 2015, taxpayers will need to consider not only the application of two new taxes in Scotland but the differences in the administration of those taxes from the administration of their equivalents south of the border. In particular, transaction warranties and indemnities may need to adapt to the different Scottish enquiry period and the possibility of mediation.
Separately, the impact on the property market and the wider economy of the Scottish Government's approach to the devolved taxes is to be examined by the Scottish Parliament's Finance Committee as it begins its scrutiny of the 2015-16 draft Budget. The draft budget, which is due to be introduced in early October, will this year include proposals for setting rates and bands for the devolved taxes, including LBTT. The Finance Committee has launched a call for evidence to get views on these proposals and the likely impact on the property market and the wider economy. The call for evidence is open until Friday 24 October 2014. We understand that the aim is for the LBTT bands and tax rates to be announced on 9 October 2014.
Transfer of assets abroad legislation: Implications for the Employee Benefit Trust Settlement Opportunity (EBTSO)
We understand that HMRC will shortly be publishing guidance to clarify its views on a number of specific issues that have arisen on the application of section 731 ITA 2007 (often known as the “benefits charge”) to employee benefit trusts (EBTs) in the context of the EBTSO. In particular, HMRC considers the circumstances in which a settlement under the EBTSO could give rise to a benefit on the EBT beneficiaries to be taxed under the provision.
The benefits charge imposes a charge to income tax on an individual who is resident in the UK, where, broadly, a relevant transfer occurs and the individual receives a benefit which is provided out of assets which are available as a result of the transfer. It only applies where the individual is not liable to income tax as the person who made the relevant transfer and the individual is not otherwise liable to income tax on the amount or value of the benefit. As such, a liability arises where the individual has not made or procured the transfer into the EBT.
The guidance looks how a liability can arise in the context of an EBT arrangement and how entering into an EBTSO settlement with HMRC might impact on future capital distributions and what would constitute a benefit for the purposes of the provision. It also looks at what constitutes relevant income for the purposes of the provision and whether, if the trustees use accumulated income to settle the PAYE and national insurance contribution liabilities arising under a settlement agreement, this reduces the amount of relevant income available. Finally, it considers whether a liability arising under the provision can be included as part of a settlement under the EBTSO.
We have been provided with an advance copy of the guidance which should be read in conjunction with the frequently asked questions issued in August 2012. We are considering whether the guidance may require any further additional clarification. Meanwhile, if you would like to discuss HMRC's view on the above issues, please speak to your usual EY contact or that listed below.
2014 Tax Risk and Controversy Survey Report and webcast
Increased reputational, legislative and enforcement risk are putting additional pressure on tax resources, processes and technology for businesses large and small. Every company has to deal with operational tax risk but few do so with absolute certainty or complete confidence in a fast-changing landscape.
In the second report of our 2014 Tax Risk and Controversy Survey series which launches on 9 September, we highlight sources of operational risk and describe leading practices companies may want to institute to help achieve regulatory compliance while driving business performance. At 3:00pm (BST) on Thursday, 11 September, please join our panel of professionals as we discuss key findings and drivers of increased operational risk. In our report we find that:
• 68% of survey respondents say there are insufficient resources to cover tax function activities.
• 62% of the largest companies surveyed have either created or refreshed their tax risk policy in the last two years.
• Only 25% of companies say their internal controls are documented in all jurisdictions, regardless of whether or not it is required by regulators.
• Only 19% of respondents use dedicated software tools to enable and support notice information, data request and tax audit management. The remainder use email, spreadsheets or no technology at all.
To register for the webcast please click here.
Sustainable Cash: Webinars commencing 16 September
A recent EY survey of the top 2,000 US and European firms indicated that a staggering $1.3tn remains unnecessarily tied up in working capital – equivalent to a cash sum of nearly 7% of sales.
EY has identified over $25bn of cash improvement opportunities for our clients, and invites you to learn from our experience at EY's Sustainable Cash Webinar series. Over the course of five interactive 30-minute webinars, find out how to identify and maximise cash improvement opportunities and utilise your data to navigate the change programme these might require. Our flyer has more details.
The first webinar takes place on Tuesday, 16 September at 11:00am, and will run every two weeks until 11 November.
Register here to hear Mike Mills from EY's UK restructuring team consider:
• What is sustainable cash improvement?
• What is the best way to look at your business to deliver these improvements?
• What are the recent market trends in working capital performance?
Application of transfer of assets abroad legislation
In the case of Fisher & Ors, the First-tier Tribunal has considered the transfer of a telebetting bookmaking business to Gibraltar and the application of the tax anti-avoidance code on transfer of assets abroad (section 739 TA 1988). Over the course of 1999/2000, a number of telebetting businesses based in the UK moved their operations to Gibraltar. At the time, the betting duty regime was considerably more favourable in Gibraltar than in the UK.
The Tribunal considered the following issues and concluded that none of them prevented the anti-avoidance provisions applying:
• Whether the anti-avoidance provision requires there to have been actual avoidance of income tax before it can apply
• Whether it is possible for the provision to apply to situations where there are multiple shareholders of the transferor company
• hether it is possible to apply the provision to the context of the income of a trading company whose business evolves into areas distinct from the business which was transferred
• Whether the fact that competing businesses were also moving to Gibraltar had an impact of the operation of the motive defence
The Tribunal found as a fact that the purpose of the transfer was the avoidance of UK betting duty.
It also considered whether the EU freedoms of establishment and movement of capital were applicable in this case, especially given Gibraltar’s particular status under the EU Treaty. In relation to two of the taxpayers, the Tribunal found that the EU freedoms did not apply as between the UK and Gibraltar. Under the relevant European legislation, the situation was one which was to be regarded as wholly internal to the Member State (ie, the UK).
However, one of the taxpayers was an Irish national. The Tribunal allowed the appeal in this case on the basis that the taxpayer's Irish nationality meant that the European freedoms of establishment and movement of capital applied in relation to the taxpayer’s ability to establish and move capital to Gibraltar. The UK anti-avoidance legislation which applied at the relevant time was held to operate to restrict those rights, without justification, and was not proportionate. The Tribunal applied a conforming interpretation to the UK legislation, to widen the scope of the motive defence, so as to consider the purpose for which the transfer took place in respect of that particular taxpayer. This case confirms that an EU defence is, in principle, available in respect of the provisions as they applied in this case. Although the legislation has been amended since then there is still an open question as to its current compatibility with European law.
The transfer of assets abroad provisions are a broad spectrum anti-avoidance rule that can sometimes apply in surprising circumstances and this case could have important ramifications for the detailed application of these provisions. This is particularly the case where a company with multiple shareholders makes a transfer.
VAT exemption for cultural services
In the case of the British Film Institute, the Upper Tribunal considered the scope of the VAT exemption for cultural services. The disputed matter concerns whether the taxpayer, a non-profit-making body and a registered charity, was required to account for VAT on the sale of tickets for admission to films that it showed. The taxpayer contended that its supplies were VAT exempt as cultural services within the meaning of EU law.
In finding for the taxpayer, the First-tier Tribunal had held that the relevant provision of EU law had direct effect, and that admission to a cinema or other venue showing films was a cultural service for the purposes of EU law. It further held that all cultural services qualify for exemption under EU law (ie, Member States cannot choose which cultural services to exempt), provided they are supplied by an eligible body (as defined by the Member State concerned). The Upper Tribunal agreed that the relevant provision of EU law was sufficiently clear and precise for it to have direct effect, and it did not allow Member States any latitude or discretion in its application. As a consequence, the corresponding provision of UK VAT law, which only exempts some cultural services and, therefore, contains limitations (including the omission of cinemas), is arguably in breach of EU law.
Any eligible taxpayers who supply cultural services, but have been refused exemption by HMRC on the ground that the services in question are not listed in UK law (eg, cinemas), may wish to consider the implications of this decision and the possibility of submitting a retrospective claim for overpaid VAT.
Other UK developments
Tax avoidance and Government contracts
HMRC and the Cabinet Office have undertaken a review of the tax and procurement policy which came into effect from 1 April 2013. These rules require potential suppliers under Government contracts to certify, as part of the procurement process, that they have not been involved in certain tax avoidance arrangements. The potential cost of not being able to certify is exclusion from the bidding process.
The review explored whether the policy is having the intended effect of encouraging tax compliance from Government suppliers. It found that of the 65 bids applying for central Government contracts of £5mn or more, one potential bidder failed the overriding mandatory procurement test. This failure, however, was due to the bidder being unable to provide and deliver services that would fulfil the procurement department's contract, rather than an issue of whether or not they were tax compliant. The remaining 64 potential bidders declared that they had been tax compliant.
Groups bidding for Government contracts within the rules will want to ensure that they continue to comply with the requirements.
New HMRC guidance on foreign branch exemption, including anti-diversion rule
HMRC has published an updated chapter on the foreign permanent establishment (PE) exemption in its International Manual. The changes include new guidance on the anti-diversion rules applying to foreign PEs beginning on or after 1 January 2013. The anti-diversion rules broadly align the exemption regime with that of the controlled foreign company rules to prevent the diversion of profits from the UK to exempt PEs. These rules were updated to reflect the reform of the UK controlled foreign companies regime which came into effect (subject to transitional provisions) for accounting periods of controlled foreign companies commencing on or after 1 January 2013.
Other issues addressed in the new guidance include:
• The disapplication of the restriction on the exemption for certain chargeable gains of close companies for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2013
• The operation of the provision which prevents profits or losses from investment business from qualifying under the branch exemption
• The treatment of certain PE profits or losses from a leasing business
Patent Box Survey
HM Treasury and HMRC are trying to determine the impact of the introduction of the UK Patent Box regime and would like to increase their stakeholder engagement. To that end they are seeking input from businesses on a number of questions regarding their ownership of patents and use of the UK Patent Box. There was a limited time to respond to the initial request with input due by 15 August 2014. However, we now understand from HMRC that the deadline has been extended to early September.
Whether a building was used for the purposes of a trade
In the case of Thomson, the Upper Tribunal considered whether expenditure incurred by the taxpayer on fitting out a building as a laundry qualified for an initial industrial buildings allowance of 100%. The optimum size for the laundry was in excess of the requirements of Lanarkshire Primary Care NHS Trust (the principal user) and the excess capacity was taken up by two other health boards.
The allowance was only available if the building was used for the purposes of a trade. The First-tier Tribunal held that the building met this condition and the Upper Tribunal has now agreed that the First-tier Tribunal's finding that the laundry activity fell within the scope of trading was one that it was reasonably entitled to make.
The Upper Tribunal found that most of the arguments presented on behalf of HMRC came down to either the absence of a profit motive (given the purpose was only to use up excess capacity through recharges) or to the fact that the laundry activity was carried on by three health boards all of whose costs come out of the public purse.
The Upper Tribunal held that neither of these features precluded a finding that a trade was being carried on. Even if HMRC's description of the laundry arrangements as a cost-sharing exercise were accurate, that would not address the question whether what was done amounted to trading.
Whether landfill material producing methane gas subject to landfill tax
The taxpayer is seeking permission to appeal the Upper Tribunal's decision in favour of HMRC in Patersons of Greenoakhill Ltd to the Court of Appeal. This case concerns the application of landfill tax where some of the material deposited in a landfill site decomposed and produced landfill gas which was captured and used by the taxpayer (the operator of the site) to generate electricity. The disputed issue is whether the taxpayer was entitled to reclaim the landfill tax paid on that biodegradable material, which the Upper Tribunal answered in the negative.
New Russian sales tax and VAT return
A new federal sales tax has been proposed for introduction by the 85 federal regions within the Russian Federation. Details of the sales tax are still being confirmed but draft legislation is being drawn up to allow the regions to introduce the tax with effect from 1 January 2015. There is still uncertainty over the details of the new legislation (it will be for each federal region to implement the tax) and the practical implications of its introduction.
Under the proposals, organisations and individual entrepreneurs carrying out activities in federal regions where a sales tax has been introduced will be liable to charge and account for the tax. The current draft provides for the implementation of a sales tax at a maximum rate of 3% on goods, services and works supplied to individuals. Businesses making supplies to consumers in Russia will be most directly affected by the introduction of the proposed sales tax. These businesses may wish to consider the associated commercial and practical implications (pricing, systems, processes, compliance etc). In addition, other businesses operating in Russia may also find that costs are increased and/or processes need to be reviewed to identify whether any sales tax incurred has been correctly charged.
Our international tax alert has further details.
Separately, the Russian tax authority is developing a new VAT return which is intended to be adopted from 1 January 2015. Our understanding is that the new return will require additional sales and purchase data and, particularly for taxpayers that act as intermediaries, additional invoice data. The final details regarding the changes are still being confirmed. Clearly a new VAT return will require changes to existing processes and systems to ensure the necessary information is recorded and VAT is paid accordingly. Some of these changes are likely to be significant in what is already a complex VAT regime.
Other international tax alerts
Please see links to a selection of our international tax alerts in respect of the following developments. Additional articles are available in our Global tax alert library.
Italy: The Italian Parliament has converted a series of tax incentives provisionally introduced by the Government into law. These include an increase in notional interest deduction benefits, a new tax credit for plant and equipment, a new withholding tax exemption on interest and an extension of the scope of the substitute tax on medium and long term loans.
US: The IRS has released general guidelines and ‘rules of engagement’ for transfer pricing issues which highlight the importance of confirming with the IRS that the correct staff are involved at the outset of any audit.
Hungary: The legal regulations which govern the implementation of employee share plans in Hungary have been relaxed.
Chile: The Ministry of Finance has presented amendments to the tax reform bill which includes a proposed series of increases in the corporate tax rate from the current 21% to 27% by 2018.
Brazil: The Revenue Service has clarified that certain amounts paid to foreign legal entities as consideration for providing data centres are payments for the provision of services subject, inter alia, to withholding tax.
Please speak to your usual EY contact, or email us at firstname.lastname@example.org, if you would like to receive a copy of our regular indirect tax newsletter, or information about our other publications.
2014 Global Oil and Gas Tax Guide
The latest edition of the guide summarises the oil and gas corporate tax regimes in 80 countries and also provides a directory of EY oil and gas tax contacts.
If you would like to discuss any of the articles in this week's edition of Midweek Tax News, please contact the individuals listed below, Claire Hooper (+ 44 20 7951 2486), or your usual EY contact.
Extractive industry reporting: Conclusion of BIS consultation
+ 44 20 7951 4017
Scottish devolved taxation
+ 44 13 1777 2822
Transfer of assets abroad legislation: Implications for the Employee Benefit Trust Settlement Opportunity
+ 44 20 7951 5912
2014 Tax Risk and Controversy Survey Report and webcast
+ 1 202 327 6053
Sustainable Cash: Webinars commencing 16 September
+ 44 20 7951 9824
Application of transfer of assets abroad legislation
+ 44 20 7951 4968
VAT exemption for cultural services
+ 44 12 1535 2622
For other queries or comments please email email@example.com.
- Operating in a shifting tax landscape
The global tax landscape continues to change in a dramatic fashion, with near-constant news hitting the headlines regarding shifting tax policy, increasing levels of enforcement and the growing potential of reputational risk.
Multinational companies now have to balance more competing priorities than ever before, ensuring they protect their business by monitoring and responding to changes in policy, legislation and tax enforcement, while at the same time ensuring they not only maintain the highest levels of compliance but also add value from the tax function.
Governments work to secure each tax dollar they're due
From a policy perspective, all governments want their country to be viewed as an attractive place to do business, to attract jobs and capital in an increasingly competitive globalized arena.
At the same time, they want to increase the amount of revenue they bring in. Governments are treading a fine line, constantly assessing how to secure the tax revenues they see as rightly theirs, while at the same time being in direct competition with other nations, making sure they do not scare off mobile capital.
Tax administrations for their part are adapting their enforcement strategies, focus and policies in response to the changing dynamics of business. They are working to ensure that their resources are being applied to the right issues and taxpayers. They share more leading practices and taxpayer information with their foreign counterparts, to help them collect every dollar due.
Disputes are on the rise
The result has been more frequent, complex and higher value disputes between taxpayers and taxing authorities — a trend that is only increasing as countries collaborate together and as emerging markets gain in stature and influence, taking a more sophisticated approach to taxation. Penalties are becoming more stringent and the threat of reputational risk has risen significantly in recent months.
We can help you to navigate a route through this complex landscape.
We can help you monitor and react to quickly-changing tax policy and assess the economic and fiscal impact.
Where tax policies might create an impediment to your business that is unintended by policy makers, we can help you to collaborate – either solely, or as part of a broader grouping of companies who share a common objective – with government to:
- Explain the impediment
- Develop alternative policy choices which are logical and well thought out
- Model the potential outcomes
- Deliver an alternative choice to the government in a form with which policy makers can comfortably work
We also help you address your global tax controversy, enforcement and disclosure needs.
We focus on pre-filing controversy management to help you properly and consistently file your returns and prepare the relevant back-up documentation.
Where a controversy has already occurred, our professionals leverage the network's collective knowledge of how tax authorities operate, and increasingly work together, to help resolve difficult or sensitive tax disputes. To ensure that continuous performance improvements are instigated after a controversy, we work with EY's other tax professionals to ensure that similar events are less likely to occur.
Below you can access our views and analysis of some of the substantial policy and enforcement trends and issues at play today.
- Seizing the opportunity in Global Compliance and Reporting
Global Compliance and Reporting (GCR) is at a tipping point, with risks on the rise. Many companies distribute responsibility for GCR processes throughout their organization, creating a patchwork. Local jurisdictions are rewriting regulations, focusing more intently on the collection of tax revenues and sharing more taxpayer information across borders.
Due to the combination of evolving business models, transforming finance functions and an increasingly complex regulatory landscape, there are new opportunities to better optimize efficiency, control and value, to help mitigate risk and improve performance.
What is Global Compliance and Reporting?
GCR comprises the key elements of a company's finance and tax processes that prepare statutory financial and tax filings as required in countries around the world. These duties include:
- Statutory accounting and reporting
- Tax accounting and provisions
- Income tax compliance
- Indirect tax compliance
- Governance and control of the above processes
GCR activities reside in the middle of a broader set of record-to-report (R2R) processes. R2R is the intersection between any company's finance and tax departments and is used to capture, process and store information that is essential to statutory accounting, tax compliance and reporting. Any change to R2R processes, information, finance systems, roles and responsibilities will have a direct impact on GCR processes.
Helping you meet the new GCR demands
Fast changing compliance and reporting requirements are more demanding on tax and finance functions today than ever before. So how do you improve control and quality, manage risk, create efficiency and drive value?
Our market-leading approach combines standard and efficient processes, highly effective tools and an extensive network of local tax and accounting subject matter professionals.
- Building effective supply chains
As multinational companies seek to reach new markets and compete more effectively in mature markets, they are adapting and differentiating their supply chains. Companies’ operating models need to cater for efficiency and scale in mature markets, while having the flexibility and local ability to support growth in emerging markets. Consequently, driving true shareholder value requires an operating model that combines global and regionally differentiated processes, and integrates these with local striking power and operational excellence.
Leading companies recognize the need for integrating tax in their business planning and decision processes
Whether companies seek to enter new markets or drive efficiencies in mature markets, leading companies understand the complexities of the international tax systems. The impact of both direct taxes and indirect taxes needs to be carefully considered and integrated to drive the effectiveness of the operating model while complying with all applicable local and international tax laws and effectively manage all tax risks. Operating model effectiveness is becoming one of the cornerstones of successful competition and differentiation.
The EY TESCM offering helps ensure you do just that. Our advisory and tax professionals operate as one team to assist our clients with developing and implementing operating model optimization where business needs and requirements are the driver while making sure that tax is an integrated part of the design of the operating model architecture.
- Managing mobile workforce risk
In today's globally integrated, tightly regulated and increasingly competitive business environment, one critical success factor stands out: people. It’s no wonder that leading companies are focusing their efforts on:
- Attracting and retaining the right people
- Global talent deployment and mobility
- HR and payroll effectiveness
- Risk, governance and compliance
Managing the risks of mobile employees
While optimizing the competitive advantage of your people has long been a core objective, a more recent set of trends in the tax landscape means that large companies with an internationally mobile workforce are at a higher risk of tax noncompliance and resulting controversy than ever before.
Fortunately, an increasing number of organizations are currently either planning or embracing a wider process of change for their mobility teams.
Unintended tax compliance obligations
These travelers are increasingly creating unintended tax compliance obligations, and the resulting risks are not just personal. They are felt at the corporate level, with the corporate tax function often unaware of the extent of the spreading problem. Tax administrations are becoming increasingly aware of the issue, however, and are very effectively using new technology to identify where a tax obligation has arisen. In a rising tax enforcement landscape, this issue has significant potential to grow.
Managing these risks should be a burning platform issue for multinational companies.
Will your tax risks prompt a tax audit?
What may start as a relatively simple personal income tax compliance issue can quickly create a ripple effect, with risks such as the creation of a permanent establishment, an employment tax audit or the payment of a significant related penalty all occurring at the corporate level.
Companies, recognizing the spectrum of reputational, personal and financial risks related to tax, are making strong efforts to be compliant. There is an increasing acceptance that such issues are becoming increasingly urgent from both a reputational and a financial perspective.
How we are helping companies
Our Human Capital network embeds processes and technology that will help companies to identify and manage short-term business traveler-related risks before they occur. Where controversy has already arisen, our global Tax Controversy network can use our insights into the culture and processes and relationships with each key tax administration to remediate issues. With prior year issues being rapidly unearthed, and with tax administrations focusing on this issue more than ever before, the time to act is now.
Connect with us
Stay connected with us through social media, email alerts or webcasts. Or download our EY Insights app for mobile devices.
Supporting fast growth businesses and entrepreneurship in London
London is a global business hub. Find out how we bring our experience of the city and its issues together with specific industry knowledge to support London businesses.
Tax alerts: knowledge when you need it
Building a tax manifesto for manufacturing
The global re-shoring trend is creating new opportunities for the UK, but our report shows it has limited time to set itself up for future high quality manufacturing (658K, August 2014).