Westminster Accounts: Lib Dem leader and ex-cabinet minister among MPs ‘avoiding taxes’ on second jobs

Published

3 years ago

January 12, 2023

admin

Two dozen MPs since 2016 have been paid for second jobs through personal service companies they have set up, a Sky News investigation has found.

It means these MPs can exploit the fact that tax rates on companies differ from those on employment, enabling them to reduce their tax bills on second jobs.

This practice is legal and common in certain industries, but some MPs appear to have taken further steps to reduce their taxes on non-parliamentary earnings.

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey is one of 12 MPs to have received earnings from second jobs via companies owned partly or solely by their spouse, an arrangement accounting experts have said is often used to reduce taxes.

Search for your MP using the Westminster Accounts tool

Sir Ed and his wife also appear to have taken advantage of a loophole that allows reduced tax rates to be paid on money taken out of a company when it’s closed. More than £100,000 was sitting on the balance sheet of the company through which Sir Ed received payment for five second jobs held between 2017 and 2022, before the company was liquidated earlier this year.

Ex-cabinet minister Ranil Jayawardena, another to receive earnings from second jobs via a company owned with his wife, claims to have been doing two separate roles with the same company at the same time between 2017 and 2020 – an arrangement that may have afforded him further tax benefits.

Sky News spoke to more than half a dozen tax and accounting experts who confirmed that, while all payments are likely lawful, MPs can use these methods to reduce taxes on their earnings from second jobs.

Use of personal service companies enables taxes to be minimised

By setting up companies through which they offer their consultancy services – known as personal service companies – MPs pay corporation tax and dividend taxes on their non-parliamentary work, rather than income taxes, as they do on their MP salary.

In receiving money this way, some MPs can reduce their tax rate by around 5% on their additional jobs, depending on how much they’re earning.

But using these companies enables additional ways through which taxes can be minimised.

Giving spouses or other family members a salary or shares in the MP’s business can further reduce tax bills. If the family member is a basic rate taxpayer, they would pay tax rates almost four times lower on dividends received from the company than an MP, who are higher rate taxpayers.

Of the 24 MPs using these companies, 12 list a family member as a shareholder or director.

But perhaps the biggest tax benefit when using a personal service company comes when earnings from second jobs are built up in the company before it is closed down and liquidated.

Under these circumstances, tax rates on additional earnings for MPs – who pay 40% tax on the upper end of their £84,144 MP salary – can be as low as the 10% capital gains tax rate paid on assets when a company is closed.

Three MPs have liquidated companies through which they were receiving their second earnings and two of these – Sir Ed Davey and Robert Butler – had significant amounts of cash on the balance sheet when the companies were closed.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Energy Destinations Ltd, the company Sir Ed’s earnings were paid into, was closed in June this year with £103,717 of assets distributed upon its liquidation. The company was previously transferred from Mr Davey to his wife in 2017, but he continued to receive more than £350,000 in payments from second jobs into the company until earlier this year.

‘It’s perfectly legal, but is it fair?’

HMRC introduced rules in 2016 to stop the practice of opening and closing companies as a means of obtaining relief.

The tax break can still be used however as long as the business owner doesn’t open a new company within two years doing similar work.

Ian Dickinson, tax director of UHY Hacker Young, said of people taking active steps in this way to reduce taxes on their work:

“It’s within that parameter of tax avoidance, which is perfectly legal, but is it fair?

“If you’ve got people exploiting the rules trying to pay as little as possible, using convoluted structures, that are well known but beyond the remit of the normal person, it just doesn’t sit right.”

Experts have criticised the wider system that encourages these arrangements. Judith Freedman, emeritus professor of taxation law and policy at the University of Oxford said: “We have a poorly designed tax system. We should be taxing people operating through different legal forms in far more similar ways.

“There’s the fact that you can convert your labour income into capital. That’s a problem. There’s the fact that you can income split. That’s a problem. And there’s the fact that you don’t pay any national insurance on dividends. That’s a problem”.

MPs run the risk of breaking the rules

A spokesperson for Sir Ed said: “All of Ed’s business was entirely in keeping with the rules, and he has been fully transparent about it.

“Money that his wife earned also went into the company. All capital gains tax due on the proceeds will be paid.”

People close to Sir Ed were also keen to point out that the Liberal Democrat leader’s earnings helped fund care for his disabled son.

While the use of personal service companies to manage second-job earnings is legal, there is one area where tax experts have told Sky News that some MPs could be running the risk of breaking rules.

It relates to whether MPs’ second jobs are considered consultancy roles or whether they are deemed employment by a company. If the latter, additional taxes are likely due when receiving earnings through their own companies.

Three MPs – Mark Pritchard, Ranil Jayawardena, and Ed Davey – have taken on jobs that HMRC considers employment – non-executive directorships – while still receiving fees for these jobs through their companies.

It is possible to make a voluntary declaration to HMRC to ensure the correct taxes are paid on these jobs, but experts said that people typically rarely do so when receiving fees via a company. In these circumstances the company is an “unnecessary structure”, according to employment status expert Rebecca Seeley-Harris, although there is no evidence to suggest these three MPs have not made the required voluntary declaration.

‘A dangerous operation’

Former environment secretary Mr Jayawardena had a particularly unusual arrangement, where he appears to have done two different jobs for the same company at the same time between 2017 and 2020.

His personal service company received share options valued at £20,000 per year from pharmaceutical company PepTCell Ltd in return for providing “a non-executive director for approximately four days a year”, according to his entry in the register of members’ financial interests. Companies House filings confirm Mr Jayawardena was a director of PepTCell.

But Mr Jayawardena also declared a second role as a strategic consultant with PepTCell at the same time, with his own company again receiving share options valued at £20,000 in return for four days work per year.

Ms Seeley-Harris noted that an arrangement like this would need to have clear delineations to ensure there weren’t tax issues, but that the nature of the two roles made this difficult.

“If you’re both a consultant and a non-executive director (NED), the consultant work has to be an entirely different piece of work. So you can’t give strategic advice to a company that you’re a non-executive director of, where your job as an NED is to give strategic advice.

“I’m surprised in this day and age that the accountants aren’t advising them that they can’t do that, it’s such a dangerous operation.”

Mr Jayawardena didn’t respond when asked for comment by Sky News.

UK

Who are the suspended Labour MPs – and why did they lose the whip?

Published

5 hours ago

July 16, 2025

admin

Who are the suspended Labour MPs - and why did they lose the whip?

Sir Keir Starmer has suspended four Labour MPs today for “repeated breaches of party discipline”.

Brian Leishman, Chris Hinchliff, Neil Duncan-Jordan and Rachael Maskell were suspended from the parliamentary Labour Party and will sit as independent MPs.

All four voted against the government’s welfare reforms earlier this month, among 47 party MPs to rebel.

Follow the latest at Politics Hub

However, Sky News understands that this isn’t the only reason behind the decision, and that more suspensions could come.

But who are the four MPs suspended? And how critical were they of the government?

Brian Leishman

The MP for Alloa and Grangemouth was first elected in last year’s general election. While the constituency was contested for the first time that year, it would have been an SNP seat notionally.

Mr Leishman is also a member of the Socialist Campaign Group inside Labour and was previously elected to Perth and Kinross Council in 2022.

A frequent voter against the government, he has criticised his party for not doing enough to save Grangemouth oil refinery, and rebelled against votes on the Winter Fuel Allowance and welfare.

In a statement, he said: “I am a proud Labour member, and I remain committed to the party.”

He added that he wishes “to remain a Labour MP and deliver the positive change many voters are craving,” but added he voted against the government on some issues to represent his constituents.

“I firmly believe that it is not my duty as an MP to make people poorer, especially those that have suffered because of austerity and its dire consequences,” he said.

“It is the honour of my life to be the MP for Alloa and Grangemouth, and my priority remains representing and fighting for constituents, whether they voted for me or not.”

Chris Hinchliff

Another 2024 newcomer to Parliament, the MP for North East Hertfordshire is one of the younger politicians at 31 years old.

He won the constituency for the first time since it was established in 1997.

As MP, Mr Hinchliff has supported rebellions on cuts to welfare and the Winter Fuel Allowance, and also proposed amendments to the government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill – criticising the government’s consultation with private finance groups – in April.

So far, the MP hasn’t made a public statement, but he had previously said he didn’t mind losing the whip over his opposition to the welfare cuts.

Neil Duncan-Jordan

The MP for Poole was also elected in the 2024 election, winning his seat from the Conservatives by just 18 votes. It was the first time Labour had won in the constituency.

Before standing for election, Mr Duncan-Jordan was a regional officer for UNISON, one of the largest trade unions in the UK.

He’s been an outspoken critic of proposed cuts to welfare and disability payments, calling the welfare bill a “dog’s dinner” and last year leading an early day motion to postpone an end to the Winter Fuel Allowance.

In response to losing the whip, said in a statement: “I understood this could come at a cost, but I couldn’t support making disabled people poorer”.

“Although I’ve been suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party today,” he added, “I’ve been part of the Labour and trade union movement for 40 years and remain as committed as ever to its values.

“To my constituents: it’s business as usual. I remain your hardworking local MP, I will continue to take up your concerns and speak up for Poole.”

Rachael Maskell

Shortly before 4pm, the MP for York Central became the fourth MP to be suspended by the government for rebelling.

In Parliament since 2015, Ms Maskell led the welfare rebellion against the government’s reforms – and voted against them even after they were significantly watered down.

Earlier this month, she told Sky News presenter Gareth Barlow: “No one feels comfortable when the family is arguing, and that’s why listening is so important.

“I want to see instituted back in the heart of the party a recognition of the role of backbenchers.”

And speaking to Sky’s chief political correspondent Jon Craig after her suspension, she said: “The reason I have been suspended is because I voted in the way I did. I believe I am fighting for people that really matter, the poorest people in society.

“That is why the Labour Party was created – I will never give up that fight.”

UK

Starmer says former Tory ministers have ‘serious questions to answer’ over Afghan data breach

Published

9 hours ago

July 16, 2025

admin

Starmer says former Tory ministers have 'serious questions to answer' over Afghan data breach

Sir Keir Starmer has said former Tory ministers have “serious questions to answer” about how the names of Afghans who worked with UK forces were exposed.

Nearly 7,000 Afghan nationals are being relocated to the UK after their names were accidentally sent in an email in February 2022, when Boris Johnson was prime minister, but the leak was only discovered by the British military in August 2023, when Rishi Sunak was PM.

A super-injunction, preventing the reporting of the mistake, was imposed that year in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak.

The Conservative government at the time then started transporting thousands of Afghans to the UK in secret as they were in danger.

On Tuesday, the injunction was lifted.

Politics latest: Starmer hammered over unexpected inflation rise

Kicking off Prime Minister’s Questions, Sir Keir said: “Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen.

“The chair of the defence committee has indicated that he intends to hold further inquiries.

“I welcome that and hope that those who are in office at the time will welcome that scrutiny.”

The data breach saw a defence official accidentally release details of almost 19,000 people seeking to flee Afghanistan after the return of the Taliban.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch avoided mentioning the data breach, but Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey said it was “shocking” how it had been kept secret for three years.

Sir Ed said the prime minister will have the Lib Dems’ support if he decides to pursue a public inquiry.

Mr Healey’s Tory predecessor, Sir Ben Wallace, said he makes “no apology” for applying for the initial four-month injunction and insisted it was “not a cover-up”.

The scheme, which had been kept under wraps until yesterday, has so far cost hundreds of millions of pounds.

However, the total cost to the taxpayer of existing schemes to assist Afghans who are deemed eligible for British support, as well as the additional cost from the breach, will come to at least £6bn.

Earlier, Defence Secretary John Healey told Sky News he is “deeply uncomfortable” with the government using a super-injunction to keep the massive data breach hidden.

He said: “I’m really deeply uncomfortable with the idea that a government applies for a super-injunction.

“If there are any [other] super-injunctions in place, I just have to tell you – I don’t know about them. I haven’t been read into them.

“The important thing here now is that we’ve closed the scheme.”

Mr Healey was informed of the breach while in opposition, and earlier this year he commissioned a review that led to the injunction being lifted.

He said “accountability starts now” and added Labour had to deal with the risks, court papers, intelligence assessments and different schemes when they came to power last summer before they could lift the injunction.

UK

Inflation jumps to 3.6% on fuel and food price pressures

Published

9 hours ago

July 16, 2025

admin

Inflation jumps to 3.6% on fuel and food price pressures

The rate of inflation has risen by more than expected on the back of fuel and food price pressures, according to official figures which have prompted accusations of an own goal for the chancellor.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported a 3.6% level for the 12 months to June – a pace not seen since January last year.

That was up from the 3.4% rate seen the previous month. Economists had expected no change.

Money latest: What do inflation figures mean for rate cut prospects?

ONS acting chief economist Richard Heys said: “Inflation ticked up in June driven mainly by motor fuel prices which fell only slightly, compared with a much larger decrease at this time last year.

“Food price inflation has increased for the third consecutive month to its highest annual rate since February of last year. However, it remains well below the peak seen in early 2023.”

A key driver of food inflation has been meat prices.

Beef, in particular, has shot up in cost – by more than 30% over the past year – according to Association of Independent Meat Suppliers data reported by FarmingUK.

High global demand alongside raised production costs have been blamed.

But Kris Hamer, director of insight at the British Retail Consortium, said: “While inflation has risen steadily over the last year, food inflation has seen a much more pronounced increase.

“Despite fierce competition between retailers, the ongoing impact of the last budget and poor harvests caused by the extreme weather have resulted in prices for consumers rising.”

It marked a clear claim that tax rises imposed on employers by Rachel Reeves from April have helped stoke inflation.

Balwinder Dhoot, director of sustainability and growth at the Food and Drink Federation, said: “The pressure on food and drink manufacturers continues to build. With many key ingredients like chocolate, butter, coffee, beef, and lamb, climbing in price – alongside high energy and labour expenses – these rising costs are gradually making their way into the prices shoppers pay at the tills.”

Chancellor Rachel Reeves said of the data: “I know working people are still struggling with the cost of living. That is why we have already taken action by increasing the national minimum wage for three million workers, rolling out free breakfast clubs in every primary school and extending the £3 bus fare cap.

“But there is more to do and I’m determined we deliver on our Plan for Change to put more money into people’s pockets.”

The wider ONS data is a timely reminder of the squeeze on living standards still being felt by many households – largely since the end of the COVID pandemic and subsequent energy-driven cost of living crisis.

Record rental costs alongside elevated borrowing costs – the latter a result of the Bank of England’s action to help keep a lid on inflation – have added to the burden on family budgets.

Most are still reeling from the effects of high energy bills.

The cost of gas and electricity is among the reasons why the pace of price growth for many goods and services remains above a level the Bank would ideally like to see.

Added to that is the toll placed on finances by wider hikes to bills. April saw those for water, council tax and many other essentials rise at an inflation-busting rate.

The inflation figures, along with employment data due tomorrow, are the last before the Bank of England is due to make its next interest rate decision on 7 August.

The vast majority of financial market participants, and many economists, expect a quarter point cut to 4%.

That forecast is largely based on the fact that wider economic data is suggesting a slowdown in both economic growth and the labour market – twin headaches for a chancellor gunning for growth and juggling hugely squeezed public finances.

Professor Joe Nellis, economic adviser at the advisory firm MHA, said of the ONS data: “This is a reminder that while price rises have slowed from the highs of 2021-23, the battle against inflation is far from over and there is no return to normality yet – especially for many households who are still feeling the squeeze on essentials such as food, energy, and services.

“However, while the Bank of England is expected to take a cautious approach to interest rate policy, we still expect a cut in interest rates when the Monetary Policy Committee next votes on 7th August.

“Despite inflation at 3.6% remaining above the official 2% target, a softening labour market – slowing wage growth and decreasing job vacancies – means that the MPC will predict inflation to begin falling as we head into the new year, justifying the lowering of interest rates.”