Dear HM Revenue and Customs,

I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I would be interested in any information held by your organisation regarding my request. I understand that I do not have to specify particular files or documents and it is the departments responsibility to provide the information I require. If you need further clarification please contact me via this website. I would like to request the following information:

In relation to the disguised remuneration legislation, please provide me with details of how many scheme operators/providers who have been investigated by HMRC and where the arrangements have subsequently been found not to be compliant.

If my request is denied in whole or in part I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I will also expect you to release all non-exempt material. I reserve the right to appeal your decision to withhold any information or to charge excessive fees. I would be grateful if you could confirm in writing that you have received this request. I look forward to your response within 20 working days as outlined by the statute. Many thanks for your assistance with this request.

Yours faithfully,

Reggie

Dear [email address] on behalf of FOI Central Team,

Firstly thank you for taking the time to reply to my request. However, It seems you have completely misunderstood my request which was:

“In relation to the disguised remuneration legislation, please provide me with details of how
many scheme operators/providers who have been investigated by HMRC and where the
arrangements have subsequently been found not to be compliant.”

Please note that I was looking for a plain and simple number as to how many have been found not to be compliant. At no stage have i requested the process on how you investigate such promoters or what tools you use. Therefore please can you revisit my request for information as I see no reason why a simple number cannot be provided, nor understand how providing such a number would prejudice any future investigations.

Yours sincerely,

Reggie Clark