Campaigners and MPs are calling for a parliamentary inquiry into the Loan Charge scandal – accusing HMRC of “airbrushing” its approach to a harsh tax crackdown linked to several suicides.
The Loan Charge Action Group (LCAG) has hit out at the Treasury Committee after it wrote to the tax office requesting information on its approach to contractor loan schemes.
These were widely – but wrongly – promoted by employers as HMRC compliant in the early 2000s, and tens of thousands of workers who signed up for them are now facing life-ruining bills for tax on their salaries which their employer should have paid.
Campaigners said the Treasury Committee letter was “little more than a tick box exercise triggered by all of the recent coverage of the Loan Charge” and an inquiry which hears from victims and tax experts is needed.
Steve Packham, spokesperson for the LCAG, told Sky News: “It is frustrating that instead of holding a full select committee inquiry to hear evidence from those facing the Loan Charge and tax sector professionals, the Treasury select committee has merely written to HMRC.
“It seems that this is little more than a tick box exercise triggered by all of the recent coverage of the Loan Charge, allowing HMRC to pedal the usual misleading and partial responses.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:31
Loan scheme causing tax turmoil
He accused the committee of a “failure of parliamentary scrutiny in the same way the Post Office were not properly challenged for too long” – in reference to the Horizon IT scandal.
“What is needed is a full select committee inquiry and we urge committee members to announce one and call a variety of witnesses, including those whose lives have been ruined by HMRC’s approach.”
Sky News has previously reported on how tens of thousands of people across the country are facing crippling tax demands from HMRC in a campaign that has been linked to 10 suicides.
Advertisement
What is the Loan Charge?
It all comes back to a 2016 piece of legislation that made individuals responsible for tax which their employers should have paid – the “Loan Charge”.
HMRC has been criticised by MPs and tax experts for not policing the contractor sector at the time of the schemes.
Employers were paid their salaries in loans – and it was widely marketed as HMRC compliant.
Some people facing the Loan Charge, including nurses, cleaners and teachers, have said they had no choice but to be paid this way when they accepted their jobs, while others insist they were trying to do the right thing and streamline their tax affairs following the introduction of complex self-employment rules.
No scheme promoters prosecuted
In his letter to the treasury committee, Jim Harra, the director of HMRC, confirmed that there have been no prosecutions of individuals “for the promotion and/or operation” of what it now calls Disguised Remuneration (DR) schemes – noting that “promotion or operation of mass-marketed tax avoidance schemes is not by itself a criminal offence”.
Mr Harra’s letter also revealed that the median settlement for individuals is £19,000, though noted about 40,000 people have still not settled. Approximately 50,000 people are estimated to be affected in total.
He denied accusations the department operates without scrutiny, saying it is “simply not the case that HMRC is unaccountable” and “we act under the general direction of ministers”.
Taking a firm line on recent criticism of “sinister” new tactics, he said: “We do not accept claims that we have been deliberately heavy-handed. We certainly do not intentionally write to taxpayers on specific days, such as their birthday, to increase the impact of our interventions.
“We do not play with people’s emotions. We recognise that there is a human story behind each one of these cases and we take our Charter responsibilities very seriously.”
Chair of the Treasury Committee, Conservative MP Harriett Baldwin, said: “Many of my colleagues have raised concerns about the implementation and management of the Loan Charge by HMRC. As a Committee, we believed it was important that we got answers both for our fellow MPs and their constituents.
“I hope the information contained in Mr Harra’s response makes a useful contribution to the public debate.”
However, fellow Conservative MP Greg Smith, co-chair of the Loan Charge APPG, said while it is “welcome” the committee is raising the Loan Charge “as well as writing to HMRC, it needs to also hear from victims and tax professionals who can show that so much of what HMRC says is simply not an accurate picture of the Loan Charge Scandal”.
Image: Greg Smith. Pic: PA
He said: “As usual, HMRC are airbrushing the whole mess and giving the false impression that they acted at the time and warned users, when the reality is that they failed to police the contracting sector and failed to warn contractors and then invented the Loan Charge so they go back retrospectively, but targeting only the workers, not those who operated the schemes.
“With 10 confirmed suicides and 13 attempted suicides, as well as countless lives already ruined, the Treasury Select Committee should also seek evidence from other parties, to get a more realistic picture of the whole Loan Charge Scandal.”
He warned: “Without a change of approach from HMRC, we are very fearful of the consequences and we hope the Select Committee will join us in properly holding HMRC to account, before more lives are ruined”.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK.
A Manhattan crypto investor is facing serious charges after allegedly kidnapping and torturing an Italian man in a disturbing bid to extract access to digital assets.
John Woeltz, 37, was arraigned on Saturday in Manhattan criminal court following his arrest on Friday. He stands accused of holding a 28-year-old Italian man captive for weeks inside a luxury townhouse in Soho, reportedly rented for $30,000 per month.
According to police reports cited by The New York Times, the victim arrived in the US on May 6 and was allegedly abducted by Woeltz and an accomplice.
The attackers are said to have stolen the man’s passport and electronic devices before demanding the password to his Bitcoin (BTC) wallet. When he refused, the suspects allegedly subjected him to prolonged physical abuse.
The victim described being beaten, shocked with electricity, assaulted with a firearm and even dangled from the upper floors of the five-story building.
He also told police that Woeltz used a saw to cut his leg and forced him to smoke crack cocaine. Threats were also reportedly made against his family.
Photographic evidence found inside the property, including Polaroids, appears to support claims of sustained abuse. The victim managed to escape on Friday and alert authorities, leading to Woeltz’s arrest.
Woeltz was charged with four felony counts, including kidnapping for ransom, and entered a plea of not guilty. Judge Eric Schumacher ordered him to be held without bail. He is expected back in court on May 28.
A 24-year-old woman was also taken into custody on Friday in connection with the incident. However, she was seen walking freely in New York the next day, and no charges against her were found in the court’s online database.
Authorities have yet to clarify the relationship between the suspect and the victim or whether any cryptocurrency was ultimately stolen.
Executives and investors in the crypto industry are increasingly seeking personal security services as kidnapping and ransom cases surge, especially in France.
On May 18, Amsterdam-based private firm Infinite Risks International reported a rise in requests for bodyguards and long-term protection contracts from high-profile figures in the space.
This comes amid a recent surge in kidnappings and ransom attempts. David Balland, the co-founder of hardware wallet company Ledger, was kidnapped in January 2025 and held for ransom for several days before being rescued by French police.
In May 2024, the father of an unnamed crypto entrepreneur was freed from a ransom attempt after French law enforcement officials raided the location in a Paris suburb where the individual was being held hostage by organized criminals.
Sir Keir Starmer could decide to lift the two-child benefit cap in the autumn budget, amid further pressure from Nigel Farage to appeal to traditional Labour voters.
The Reform leader will use a speech this week to commit his party to scrapping the two-child cap, as well as reinstating winter fuel payments in full.
There are now mounting suggestions an easing of the controversial benefit restriction may be unveiled when the chancellor delivers the budget later this year.
According to The Observer, Sir Keir told cabinet ministers he wanted to axe the measure – and asked the Treasury to look for ways to fund the move.
The Financial Times reported it may be done by restoring the benefit to all pensioners, with the cash needed being clawed back from the wealthy through the tax system.
The payment was taken from more than 10 million pensioners this winter after it became means-tested, and its unpopularity was a big factor in Labour’s battering at recent elections.
Before Wednesday’s PMQs, the prime minister and chancellor had insisted there would be no U-turn.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:20
Will winter fuel U-turn happen?
Many Labour MPs have called for the government to do more to help the poorest in society, amid mounting concern over the impact of wider benefit reforms.
Former prime minister Gordon Brown this week told Sky News the two-child cap was “pretty discriminatory” and could be scrapped by raising money through a tax on the gambling industry.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:22
Brown questioned over winter fuel U-turn
Mr Farage, who believes Reform UK can win the next election, will this week accuse Sir Keir of being “out of touch with working people”.
In a speech first reported by The Sunday Telegraph, he is expected to say: “It’s going to be these very same working people that will vote Reform at the next election and kick Labour out of government.”
South Western Railway (SWR) has been renationalised this weekend as part of the government’s transition towards Great British Railways.
The train operator officially came under public ownership at around 2am on Sunday – and the first journey, the 5.36am from Woking, was partly a rail replacement bus service due to engineering works.
So what difference will renationalisation make to passengers and will journeys be cheaper?
Image: Pic: PA
What is nationalisation?
Nationalisation means the government taking control of industries or companies, taking them from private to public ownership.
Britain’s railway lines are currently run by train operating companies as franchises under fixed-term contracts, but Labour have said they want to take control of the lines when those fixed terms end.
In its manifesto, the party vowed to return rail journeys to public ownership within five years by establishing Great British Railways (GBR) to run both the network tracks and trains.
Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said renationalising SWR was “a watershed moment in our work to return the railways to the service of passengers”.
“But I know that most users of the railway don’t spend much time thinking about who runs the trains – they just want them to work,” she added. “That’s why operators will have to meet rigorous performance standards and earn the right to be called Great British Railways.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:32
How reliable are UK trains?
How will ticket prices be affected?
Labour have argued cutting off payments flowing into the private sector could save the taxpayer £150m a year.
But the government has not explicitly promised the savings made from nationalisation will be used to subsidise fees.
It is unlikely rail fares will fall as a result of nationalisation, rail analyst William Barter told Sky News.
“The government could mandate fare cuts if it wanted to, but there’s no sign it wants to,” he said.
“At the moment, I’m sure they would want to keep the money rather than give it back to passengers. The current operator aims to maximise revenue, and there’s no reason the government would want them to do anything differently under government control.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:54
UK has most expensive train tickets in Europe
What difference will it make for passengers?
Britain’s railways are frequently plagued by delays, cuts to services and timetable issues, but Mr Barter said nationalisation will make very little day-to-day difference to passengers.
There was “no reason to think” the move would improve issues around delays and cancellation of services, he said.
“It’s going to be the same people, the same management,” he explained.
“The facts of what the operator has to deal with in terms of revenue, infrastructure, reliability, all the rest of it – they haven’t changed.”
Image: Pic: PA
Which services are being next to be nationalised?
In the longer term, the move is likely to bring “a degree of certainty compared with relatively short-term franchises”, Mr Barter said, noting the government would only want to renationalise a franchise “because in one way or another something very bad is going on in that franchise, so in a way it can only get better”.
It also means the government will have greater accountability for fixing problems with punctuality and cancellations.
Mr Barter said: “If this is the government’s baby, then they’re going to do their best to make sure it doesn’t fail. So rather than having a franchise holder they can use as a political scapegoat, it’s theirs now.”
He added: “In the short term, I don’t think you’d expect to see any sort of change. Long term, you’ll see stability and integration bringing about gradual benefits. There’s not a silver bullet of that sort here.”
Next to be renationalised later this year will be c2c and Greater Anglia, while seven more companies will transfer over when their franchises end in the future.