• Current students
      • Student centre
        Enrol on a course/exam
        My enrolments
        Exam results
        Mock exams
      • Course information
        Students FAQs
        Student induction
        Course enrolment information
        Key dates
        Book distribution
        Timetables
        FAE elective information
        CPA Ireland student
      • Exams
        CAP1 exam
        CAP2 exam
        FAE exam
        Access support/reasonable accommodation
        E-Assessment information
        Exam and appeals regulations/exam rules
        Timetables for exams & interim assessments
        Sample papers
        Practice papers
        Extenuating circumstances
        PEC/FAEC reports
        Information and appeals scheme
        Certified statements of results
        JIEB: NI Insolvency Qualification
      • CA Diary resources
        Mentors: Getting started on the CA Diary
        CA Diary for Flexible Route FAQs
      • Admission to membership
        Joining as a reciprocal member
        Admission to Membership Ceremonies
        Admissions FAQs
      • Support & services
        Recruitment to and transferring of training contracts
        CASSI
        Student supports and wellbeing
        Audit qualification
        Diversity and Inclusion Committee
    • Students

      View all the services available for students of the Institute

      Read More
  • Becoming a student
      • About Chartered Accountancy
        The Chartered difference
        Student benefits
        Study in Northern Ireland
        Events
        Hear from past students
        Become a Chartered Accountant podcast series
      • Entry routes
        College
        Working
        Accounting Technicians
        School leavers
        Member of another body
        CPA student
        International student
        Flexible Route
        Training Contract
      • Course description
        CAP1
        CAP2
        FAE
        Our education offering
      • Apply
        How to apply
        Exemptions guide
        Fees & payment options
        External students
      • Training vacancies
        Training vacancies search
        Training firms list
        Large training firms
        Milkround
        Recruitment to and transferring of training contract
      • Support & services
        Becoming a student FAQs
        School Bootcamp
        Register for a school visit
        Third Level Hub
        Who to contact for employers
    • Becoming a
      student

      Study with us

      Read More
  • Members
      • Members Hub
        My account
        Member subscriptions
        Newly admitted members
        Annual returns
        Application forms
        CPD/events
        Member services A-Z
        District societies
        Professional Standards
        ACA Professionals
        Careers development
        Recruitment service
        Diversity and Inclusion Committee
      • Members in practice
        Going into practice
        Managing your practice FAQs
        Practice compliance FAQs
        Toolkits and resources
        Audit FAQs
        Practice Consulting services
        Practice News/Practice Matters
        Practice Link
      • In business
        Networking and special interest groups
        Articles
      • Overseas members
        Home
        Key supports
        Tax for returning Irish members
        Networks and people
      • Public sector
        Public sector presentations
      • Member benefits
        Member benefits
      • Support & services
        Letters of good standing form
        Member FAQs
        AML confidential disclosure form
        Institute Technical content
        TaxSource Total
        The Educational Requirements for the Audit Qualification
        Pocket diaries
        Thrive Hub
    • Members

      View member services

      Read More
  • Employers
      • Training organisations
        Authorise to train
        Training in business
        Manage my students
        Incentive Scheme
        Recruitment to and transferring of training contracts
        Securing and retaining the best talent
        Tips on writing a job specification
      • Training
        In-house training
        Training tickets
      • Recruitment services
        Hire a qualified Chartered Accountant
        Hire a trainee student
      • Non executive directors recruitment service
      • Support & services
        Hire members: log a job vacancy
        Firm/employers FAQs
        Training ticket FAQs
        Authorisations
        Hire a room
        Who to contact for employers
    • Employers

      Services to support your business

      Read More
☰
  • Find a firm
  • Jobs
  • Login
☰
  • Home
  • Knowledge centre
  • Professional development
  • About us
  • Shop
  • News
Search
View Cart 0 Item

News

☰
  • Home/
  • News/
  • News item
☰
  • News
  • News archive
    • 2024
    • 2023
  • Press releases
    • 2025
    • 2024
    • 2023
  • Newsletters
  • Press contacts
  • Media downloads
News
(?)

Embedding sustainability across people practices

Sustainable HR practices enhance corporate responsibility and workplace culture, attracting top talent and driving long-term success, writes Neil Hughes Sustainable HR can be viewed through two lenses. First, as a means to support initiatives that align with an organisation’s corporate social responsibility (CSR), and second, to create policies and practices that enable a sustainable workplace culture.  The Society for Human Resource Management recently reported that more than 65 percent of job seekers favour firms with sustainable HR practices. This creates a challenge for senior leaders and human resources (HR) functions to introduce sustainable HR practices that attract, retain and develop employees. Embedding sustainability across people practices HR functions can integrate sustainable HR methods throughout all people practices, including recruitment and onboarding, learning and development, performance management and hybrid working policies.  Introducing sustainable initiatives drives both operational and cultural change and supports the organisation in achieving CSR commitments and improving corporate image. Additionally, sustainable HR fosters a culture of responsibility, enhances employee engagement and contributes to long-term business success.  Recruitment functions that create sustainable ways of attracting, assessing and onboarding new staff will gain a significant competitive advantage in the ‘war for talent’. For instance, processes that are highly automated improve the candidate experience and contribute to sustainable practices.  We have seen a marked increase in HR functions designing and delivering learning and development (L&D) interventions that educate and upskill their employees on environmental and sustainable practices. L&D courses can be used to promote green initiatives such as reducing energy consumption and single-use plastics, promoting recycling, raising employee awareness and promoting action. Organisations that empower their employees with knowledge and skills in this area improve their ability to contribute to the company’s environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals. Some organisations offer the opportunity to achieve a diploma in business sustainability and provide courses that are CPD accredited.  We have also seen L&D functions become more aware of delivering learning in a sustainable way. For example, facilitating learning online rather than requiring staff to travel to face-to-face learning events. Driving engagement and long-term cultural change An important factor in our people’s motivation is their ability to make the connection between their work responsibilities and their organisation’s purpose and goals. HR functions can facilitate this connection by embedding the company’s values throughout all procedures, policies and initiatives. Additionally, sustainability can be linked to and reflected in performance evaluations.  Recognising employees who contribute to sustainability goals can incentivise further commitment across the workforce.  Importantly, HR functions should encourage employees to get involved and set the tone that achieving sustainability targets will be a collaborative effort. Employees will often have ideas that could prove valuable in enhancing the company’s approach, and establishing a space for them to comfortably share these ideas through an employee-led sustainability group can work well. Most employees recognise the social and environmental benefits of hybrid working. This is one of the most accessible and impactful sustainable HR practices that helps to reduce emissions while increasing flexibility and supporting individuals with an improved work-life balance. By implementing programmes that support physical and mental health, HR can help create a more resilient and productive workforce. All the evidence shows that sustainable HR practices benefit employee and organisational performance by improving retention, reputation, and engagement. It is clear that sustainable HR practices create a positive work environment. So, how will you begin? Neil Hughes is a Director in Grant Thornton’s People and Change Consulting practice

Apr 14, 2025
READ MORE
News
(?)

Who is responsible for growth in accounting & advisory firms?

Who should drive your firm's growth? Mary Cloonan explores whether individual partners or a dedicated leader best fuels expansion Every ambitious firm wants growth, but who should take ownership of it? Is it down to individual partners, or does the firm need a dedicated leader to drive expansion? Many firms have treated growth as an afterthought. Yet, in today’s highly competitive market, this approach is insufficient. The firms that thrive are the ones that prioritise growth across the entire organisation, instead of depending solely on a handful of standout performers. There’s no single answer to the question of who should lead growth, but some models work, particularly in more mature markets like the US, UK, and Australia, where firms have refined their approach for years. Why growth needs to be intentional Growth isn’t just about winning new clients; it’s about maximising opportunities across the board and deepening existing relationships, expanding into new markets, and ensuring that every part of the firm contributes to revenue generation. Whether your firm is backed by private equity or partner-led, the real question is: are you making the most of the opportunities in front of you? Growth is often left to chance. Some partners excel at winning work, while others concentrate on execution. However, when growth relies solely on personal initiative, opportunities can be missed. Implementing a more structured approach ensures that business development isn’t just an added benefit – it’s built into the firm’s DNA. Three effective models for driving growth Firms take different approaches depending on their structure, leadership style, and ambitions. To ensure growth is prioritised and embedded, they use three models. 1. The Chief Growth Officer (CGO) model – a unified approach Appointing a Chief Growth Officer (CGO) can be a game-changer for firms that want a clear, structured approach to growth. This leadership role integrates business development, marketing, client experience and cross selling, ensuring that growth is planned, measured and executed effectively. Rather than simply focusing on new business, a CGO takes responsibility for the entire client journey:  Business development strategy – Aligning development, marketing and client expansion with the firm’s long-term goals. Client experience and retention – Ensuring clients receive excellent service, encouraging referrals and long-term loyalty. Cross-selling and collaboration – Breaking down silos and helping different service lines work together to identify opportunities. Market positioning and thought leadership – Raising the firm’s profile in key sectors to attract high-value clients. Data-driven growth insights – Using client and market data to identify trends and opportunities. This model works well for larger firms, particularly those with ambitious growth plans or PE investment. It ensures growth is handled strategically rather than left to individual efforts. 2. The partner-led growth model – with structure & accountability Many firms still prefer a partner-led approach to business development. This approach can work well if it has structure and accountability. Business development isn’t just left to chance in firms that succeed with this model. Instead, there’s a clear framework: Partners have individual growth targets that are measured and reviewed. Client expansion strategies are mapped out rather than being ad-hoc. There's support from marketing and business development teams to enable partners to focus on high-value relationships. Business development is built into the firm's culture, rather than being something squeezed in between client work. For this model to work, there needs to be a firm-wide commitment to growth, not just an expectation that some partners will bring in work while others don't. 3. The hybrid model – growth champions and collaboration A middle ground between a centralised CGO and a fully partner-driven model is to appoint “growth champions” within the firm. These are senior partners or directors who take responsibility for business development within their practice area or sector. They focus on: Developing relationships and identifying opportunities in their market. Encouraging collaboration between service lines to increase cross-selling. Working with marketing and BD teams to ensure the firm’s positioning aligns with market demand. This approach works well in mid-sized firms where partners are engaged in growth but need more structure and coordination. Your firm’s growth model The best approach depends on the size, ambition, and market focus of the firm: Smaller firms may not need a CGO but should have a structured growth committee. Mid-sized firms often benefit from a hybrid model that balances accountability with collaboration. Larger firms, particularly those preparing for a merger or acquisition or private equity investment, gain the most from a dedicated CGO. What matters most is that growth is not left to chance. Regardless of the model, firms that take growth seriously and build a strategy around it succeed. Your firm and culture Growth isn’t something that just happens. It’s something firms need to be intentional about. In a numbers-based world, there will only be one indicator to say what is right for your firm so tracking the growth KPIs is key to understanding what will work best in your firm with your culture. Mary Cloonan is Founder of Marketing Clever

Apr 14, 2025
READ MORE
Tax UK
(?)

Post EU exit corner – 14 April 2025

In this week’s post EU exit corner, we bring you the latest guidance updates and publications relevant in the post EU exit environment. The most recent Trader Support Service bulletin is also available as is the latest Brexit and Beyond newsletter from the Northern Ireland Assembly EU Affairs team. HMRC has sent an update on the deployment of ICS2 and some new resources have been published to support traders sending goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. ICS2 deployment HMRC has sent the following message about the deployment of ICS2: “Deployment windows must be requested from the Member State where EORI is registered; they are not automatically applicable. Onboarding after 1 April must be requested from HMRC by emailing ics.helpdesk@hmrc.gov.uk. Goods moved by road should onboard to ICS2 between 1 April – 1 September 2025.  Your onboarding date must be no later than the end of the deployment window. For XI EORIs, you can request this from HMRC by emailing ics.helpdesk@hmrc.gov.uk. You will need to provide your: Company name, Company address, EORI number, What your role is in ICS2 process (e.g. air carrier, postal operator, house level filer), Your applicable deployment window dates (1 April – 1 September for road), and Date within this window that you expect to onboard. If you have any further question please don’t hesitate to contact us via our mailbox nistakeholderengagementteam@hmrc.gov.uk.” HMRC has also sent a detailed email on the new parcel and freight arrangements.” Resources for traders sending goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland In relation to the new set of arrangements for the movement of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland via both parcels and freight which will take effect from the revised date of 1 May 2025, HMRC’s NI customs team has developed a new FAQs sheet on the new arrangements. This has been developed from questions raised frequently by stakeholders. Queries on the new arrangements can be sent to the NI stakeholder email address nistakeholderengagementteam@hmrc.gov.uk. HMRC has also published key information you need to provide to your haulier. Miscellaneous guidance updates and publications When HMRC selects your goods for inland pre-clearance checks, Reference Documents for The Customs Tariff (Preferential Trade Arrangements) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, Reference Documents for The Customs (Tariff Quotas) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, Reference documents for The Customs (Reliefs from a Liability to Import Duty and Miscellaneous Amendments) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, Reference document for authorised use: eligible goods and authorised uses, Reference Documents for The Customs Tariff (Suspension of Import Duty Rates) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, Reference Document for The Customs (Origin of Chargeable Goods) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, Reference Document for The Customs Tariff (Establishment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, Customs, VAT and excise UK transition legislation from 1 January 2021, Notices under The Customs Transit Procedures (EU Exit) Regulations 2018 , and Data Element 2/3: Documents and Other Reference Codes (Union) of the Customs Declaration Service.

Apr 14, 2025
READ MORE
Tax
(?)

This week’s miscellaneous updates – 14 April 2025

In this week’s miscellaneous updates, HMRC has sent the March 2025 Stakeholder Digest and we are now able to share that HMRC has paused the issuing of Self-Assessment (SA) repayments for new claims via phone, including the Agent Dedicated Line (ADL), and webchat until further notice. We remind you that HMRC’s new email query service for agents is live and the Institute for Fiscal Studies has published a podcast looking at the future of corporation tax to mark its 60th anniversary. And finally, the Charter Stakeholder Group has launched a survey on HMRC’s performance against the HMRC Charter. HMRC has paused certain SA repayments Last month HMRC made us aware that it had paused SA repayments for new claims via phone (including the ADL) and webchat until further notice. We are now officially able to share this information. The message from HMRC is as follows: “On Thursday 27 March HMRC paused the issuing of SA repayments for new claims over the telephone (including ADL) and via webchat until further notice. This measure is part of enhanced security controls introduced in response to an increase in the ongoing suspected fraudulent repayment attempts. Agents can continue to claim client refunds online via their agent account. Agents who are unable to access their online account are advised to contact our OSH on 0300 200 3600. Digitally excluded customers will need to apply by post.   If your client contacts us directly they will be advised that the best way to claim refunds is online via their online tax account or through their agent.  The majority of requests relating to existing SA repayments can continue to be made via telephone and webchat.  A small number of existing claims may be impacted by our enhanced security controls. In these limited circumstances customers will also need to claim their refund online. Telephone and webchat can continue to be used for all other SA enquiries. Please ask your members to continue to support us by:  being extra vigilant for phishing scams that could result in fraudsters gaining access to agent accounts and client tax records   choosing strong passwords and changing them regularly   paying close attention to any advice or instruction from HMRC regarding account security, particularly in the event of an agent account suspension.” Reminder: new HMRC email query service for agents This service went live from 31 March. As agents must use the ‘Where’s my reply’ process first before using the email query service, details of how to access the service are integrated into HMRC's Tax agents handbook. Go to 'Contacting HMRC' and 'Check progress and service levels' where you will see the email address which is: personaltaxqueryresolutionserviceforagents@hmrc.gov.uk. HMRC has advised that this email address is likely to change so please always ensure you refer to the full guidance should you wish to use this service. Charter Stakeholder Group 2024/25 HMRC performance survey The Charter Stakeholder Group has launched its 2024/25 survey seeking feedback on HMRC's performance against the standards in the HMRC Charter. The results of the survey are shared anonymously with HMRC and published in the Charter Annual Report. The survey contains 11 choice questions and a box for broader comments (250 words only). Responses can be made until 2 May 2025. Anyone who is an agent and a taxpayer and wants to respond in both capacities should complete the survey twice.  

Apr 14, 2025
READ MORE
Tax UK
(?)

Last chance to share your views on e-invoicing consultation

The Institute is formulating its response to the consultation “Electronic invoicing: promoting e-invoicing across UK businesses and the public sector” and wants to hear your views. This week is your last opportunity to share your views. Email tax@charteredaccountants.ie to participate. The purpose of this consultation is to gather views on standardising electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) and how to increase adoption of e-invoicing across UK businesses and the public sector. The consultation explores how different e-invoicing approaches may align with businesses and aims to support the development of a UK approach and is open until 7 May 2025. Please share your views with us by Friday 18 April 2025. Should you wish to respond individually, responses are being accepted by submitting a form or by email to einvoicingconsultation@hmrc.gov.uk.  

Apr 14, 2025
READ MORE
Tax UK
(?)

Have you taken our short survey on Making Tax Digital for income tax?

Our short six question survey on Making Tax Digital (MTD) for income tax which opened last week remains open for responses. The survey will close on Friday 25 April and will take less than 5 minutes to complete. A more detailed survey on MTD will be launched later before the summer. Take the survey now.  Despite our reservations about MTD, the Institute will continue to work with HMRC on MTD readiness and is developing a cross-department MTD strategy to assist members in their preparations. We will also continue to represent members views as we approach April 2026.  HMRC is working with an independent research agency, Verian, to understand the impact of MTD for  income tax on taxpayers. The research has recently been extended until 8 May 2025. See Check genuine HMRC contact that uses more than one communication method for more information. HMRC has also recently published guidance and a new YouTube video to assist agents with the MTD client sign-up process. Several new software providers have also recently been added to the HMRC’s list of MTD compatible software.

Apr 14, 2025
READ MORE
Press release
(?)

Significant enthusiasm for artificial intelligence (AI) amongst Chartered Accountants – new research shows

A new report from Chartered Accountants Worldwide (CAW) reveals significant enthusiasm about the use of AI in the profession, with 85% of respondents expressing willingness to use AI tools - and 91% of those aged 18–24 already using the technology. Members of Chartered Accountants Ireland were surveyed alongside respondents from 13 other Chartered bodies around the world, with the findings showing that AI is increasingly integrated into business processes and that the profession is actively embracing change. Chartered Accountants Ireland is the largest professional body on the island of Ireland, representing almost 40,000 members and educating 6,600 students. Key findings: AI is reshaping the profession - 85% of respondents are willing to use AI tools. This rises to 91% among 18–24-year-olds and is accompanied by strong understanding (59%) of the potential uses of AI in accountancy.   AI is already in use - 83% of 18–24-year-olds use AI tools weekly - mainly for general productivity, data entry, reconciliation of accounts, and financial reporting. While 80% of 18–24-year-olds feel confident using AI in their roles, only 47% of those aged 55+ share that confidence. The most used tools are Gen AI chatbots, Microsoft Copilot and business intelligence tools. 45% say AI is already helping them to work more effectively and efficiently. 31% say they are already using traditional AI in their job. 29% are already using generative AI (GenAI) in their job.   Barriers to adoption - 52% of those surveyed state that the biggest barrier to AI adoption is insufficient skills and training. 30% also cite data security concerns as a reason they do not use AI more frequently.   Upskilling is essential - despite a high willingness to use AI, there is a skills gap and feeling of unpreparedness for the changes AI will bring. 30% have participated in AI-related training through their organisation, but 92% are likely to participate if offered the opportunity. 65% expect to receive AI-related training from their professional body, while 32% expect it from employers. Commenting Barry Dempsey, Chief Executive of Chartered Accountants Ireland, said “It is really encouraging to see strong early adoption and enthusiasm in the profession. It is clear from the research, however, that current usage is largely focused on general-purpose productivity tools, rather than technical work, with much of the momentum driven by individual initiative and self-directed learning. “Only 30% have participated in AI-related training through their organisation, and among those that have not engaged in training, 61% say it is because it is not offered. There is a high employee willingness to engage, with 92% saying they are likely to participate if offered the opportunity, so bridging this gap will be crucial to unlocking the further potential of AI for the profession. Smaller practices and businesses may not have the resources to deliver tailored AI training, so it’s essential that professional bodies like ours step in to bridge that gap. There is also an opportunity for the government to play a role in supporting widespread digital upskilling, particularly for SMEs, to ensure no part of the profession is left behind as AI reshapes the business landscape.” AI is an opportunity, not a threat There is consensus in the findings that AI will augment, rather than replace, the Chartered Accountant’s role, with human intelligence remaining at the heart of the profession. Chartered Accountants will continue to rely on core skills, and the training priorities of respondents reflects this: Critical thinking (77% rate this as a priority) Data privacy and security (71% rate this as a priority) AI ethics (66% rate this as a priority) Barry Dempsey continued: “Priorities such as critical thinking, an emphasis on data privacy and security and AI ethics go to the very heart of chartered accountants as trusted business leaders. Critical thinking will continue to be crucial in scrutinising and applying AI insights to provide effective advice to business/clients. Similarly, with increased AI use, it's even more important to ensure structured, effective training to use technology ethically and protect data responsibly. “56% of respondents agree that incorporating AI makes accountancy more attractive as a career choice and we remain committed to equipping the next generation of Chartered Accountants with the skills and mindset to lead in a world shaped by innovation, from their first steps as students to their roles as future business leaders.” Read the report in full CAW_AI-in-Accountancy-web.pdf  Read media coverage Chartered accountants confident about adoption of AI in their work, survey finds – The Irish Times 

Apr 14, 2025
READ MORE
Tax
(?)

Tax Appeals Commission determinations

Case reference Tax head  Legislation  Case stated requested  Matter under consideration    30TACD2025 Capital gains tax   Section 544 TCA 1997 Section 545 TCA 1997 Section 552 TCA 1997 Section 554 TCA 1997 Section 555 TCA 1997 Section 557 TCA 1997 Section 560 TCA 1997 Section 561 TCA 1997  No   The Appellant in this case was a partner in a partnership which had acquired land in 2009. The partnership built and developed a property at a total cost of €23,023,400 which included integrated plant and machinery at a cost of €5,506,195. The plant and machinery qualified in full for capital allowances and the Appellant claimed his proportionate share of the available capital allowances on his income tax returns. Over the period of ownership of the asset, there had been a part disposal and further capital additions leaving a base cost of €19,642,020. The partnership subsequently sold the property to a third party for €20 million; there was no apportionment of the sale price specified in the contract between land and plant and machinery. The property was used solely for the purposes of a trade or profession for the entire period of ownership. The Appellant completed a capital gains tax (CGT) return based on a disposal of a single asset being the land which included the buildings thereon and fixtures therein. The Appellant contended that the qualifying expenditure on plant and machinery was part of the acquisition cost and is an allowable deduction for the purposes of section 552(1). Revenue issued one CG50 clearance for the sale of the land and buildings including the integrated plant and machinery. Revenue submitted that the single asset sold consisted of two distinct elements from a tax perspective. One element was the plant and buildings which had qualified for capital allowances over the period of ownership and the second element being land which had not attracted capital allowances. Revenue stated that as the asset sold comprised of two different types of assets for tax purposes, separate CGT computations were required, and an apportionment was required under section 544 TCA to calculate the capital gain. Revenue argued that the loss accruing on the plant and machinery could not be factored in to reduce the capital gain. It was on this basis that Revenue had issued a notice of amended assessment. The Appellant submitted that when land is sold to a purchaser which necessarily includes all buildings and fixtures and fittings that are integrated into the building, they are an integral part of the building. The Appellant argued that he was therefore entitled to deduct qualifying expenditure on plant and machinery in the CGT calculation. The Appeals Commission held that the method adopted by Revenue was not provided for in Statute and therefore was incorrect.   39TACD2025 Corporation tax   Section 884 TCA 1997 Section 917 TCA 1997 Section 949 TCA 1997 Section 959 TCA 1997 Section 1077 TCA 1997 Section 1084 TCA 1997  No   The Appellant filed corporation tax returns (Form CT1) for the accounting periods 2021 and 2022 by June 2022 and April 2023 respectively and Notices of Assessment were issued by Revenue. The Appellant’s agent encountered IT filing acceptance issues when filing the iXBRL accounts and unknowingly the accounts did not file properly. In 2024, Revenue issued revised Notices of Assessments in respect of both years to include a surcharge for late submission of returns. This was on the basis that iXBRL accounts were not filed by the specified date. The Appellant only became aware on receipt of the revised Notice of Assessments that iXBRL accounts had not been filed. Revenue has issued tax clearance certificates for all years 2021 to 2024 prior to the issue of amended assessments. The Appellant argued that the non-filing of electronic accounts was not intended or deliberate, there was no loss to Revenue and that all taxes were paid on time. Once becoming aware of the issue, there was no unreasonable delay in remedying the matter and accounts were filed within a few days. Revenue stated the Appellant did not provide correspondence at the time of filing the iXBRL accounts for the accounting periods 2021 or 2022 of the technical difficulties encountered. The Appeals Commission held that Revenue correctly applied a surcharge under section 1084(2)(a)(ii) for failing to deliver a return on or before the specified return date. The Appeals Commission held that Revenue correctly applied a surcharge under section 1084(2)(a)(ii) for failing to deliver a return on or before the specified return date.

Apr 11, 2025
READ MORE
Tax
(?)

A Taxpayer v The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2025] EWCA Civ 106 ​

This edition’s Chartered Accountants Tax Case digest looks at a case in which the Court of Appeal overturned the decision of the Upper Tribunal (UT) and restored the previous decision of the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) in finding that the taxpayer was not UK tax resident during the tax year having spent a number of days in the UK due to exceptional circumstances beyond her control that prevented her from leaving. The focus of the case was on the meaning of ‘exceptional circumstances’ in the UK Statutory Residence Test (SRT) with the Court noting in its decision that this needs to be applied to individual circumstance as a whole whilst also highlighting that such circumstances can include the reaction of a taxpayer to matters such as the illness of a close relative, and other moral obligations. Commentators are arguing that this decision essentially appears to loosen the ‘exceptional circumstances’ test. At present it is unclear whether HMRC will appeal to the Supreme Court. The UK’s SRT is used to assess if an individual taxpayer is UK tax resident and took effect from 6 April 2013. This case is the first and only case to date in which the SRT has been the subject of an appeal through the UK court system. Background The case was an appeal by the taxpayer against the UT decision which held that the taxpayer was UK tax resident for the tax year ended 5 April 2016. During 2015/16, the appellant taxpayer had received a large dividend but did not include it on her self-assessment return on the basis that it was not taxable in the UK because she was not UK tax resident in that tax year as she was tax resident in Ireland. The concept of ‘days’ spent in the UK lies at the heart of the SRT. Ordinarily, every day when a person is present in the UK at midnight at the end of the day counts for the purposes of the test. However, certain exceptional days may not be counted. Under her particular circumstances, the second automatic overseas test was relevant meaning that as she was not UK tax resident for any of the preceding three tax years prior to 2015/16, as long as she spent fewer than 46 days in the UK in 2015/16, she would not be UK tax resident. Having spent 50 days in the UK during the tax year, the appellant relied on Schedule 45 para 22 (4) of Finance Act 2013 which provides that a day does not count as a day spent in the UK if a person would not be present in the UK at the end of the day but for exceptional circumstances beyond their control that prevent them from leaving the UK and they intend to leave as soon as those circumstances permit. On two visits totalling six days in December 2015 and February 2016 she was present in the UK at the end of the day because she felt compelled to stay to help her sister who was suffering from alcoholism, was suicidal and was failing to look after her children. She therefore argued that she had only spent 44 days in the UK in 2015/16 and was not therefore UK tax resident. HMRC argued that these reasons did not amount to exceptional circumstances, and that the appellant had not been prevented from leaving the UK. HMRC issued a closure notice amending her tax return to include the dividend as taxable income. The appellant appealed to the FTT which allowed her appeal finding that although the need to care for the consequences of her sister’s alcoholism and depression did not, of itself, constitute exceptional circumstances, the fact that the sister had minor children, for whom the appellant also cared, did in their view change the position. The FTT said that it was unnecessary for a legal obligation to care for the children to exist for there to be an exceptional circumstance and stated that moral obligations and obligations of conscience, including those arising by virtue of a close family relationship, can qualify as exceptional circumstances. Finally, the FTT concluded that those obligations may be strong enough to prevent a taxpayer from leaving the UK. HMRC appealed to the UT putting forward four grounds of appeal, all of which were accepted by the UT. The UT overturned the FTT decision finding that the circumstances of the two visits in question were not exceptional, and that the appellant was not prevented from leaving the UK on any of the days by exceptional circumstances. She was therefore UK tax resident in 2015/16 making the dividend taxable income in the UK. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal on six grounds, including that the UT erred in law in its approach to the test as to whether the appellant was prevented from leaving the UK, and in holding that moral obligations cannot be or cannot be part of the exceptional circumstances. Decision At the heart of the taxpayer’s appeal was whether the appellant’s circumstances were exceptional and whether they prevented her from leaving the UK. The Court held that what prevents someone from leaving the country is not limited to certain defined categories such as a legal obligation or physical impossibility, noting that the statutory example of exceptional circumstances in Schedule 45 para 22 (5) of Finance Act 2013 which refers to a ‘sudden or life-threatening illness or injury’ is not specifically limited to the injury or illness of the taxpayer themselves, or of someone for whom they have a legal duty to care. A moral or societal obligation was suffice and in the Court’s view is likely to have also been intended by Parliament. The Court held that the UT had taken too narrow a view of what could constitute an exceptional circumstance and ruled that the moral or societal obligation that the illness of a relative imposes on a taxpayer can form part of the overall circumstance. This should also be taken account of in considering whether the circumstances as a whole are considered exceptional. The Court allowed the appellant’s appeal on all grounds and restored the decision of the FTT. The full judgment is available at: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2025/106?query=A+Taxpayer&court=ewca%2Fciv

Apr 11, 2025
READ MORE
Tax
(?)

VAT Compliance Controls—HMRC Guidelines for Compliance: An Overview

David Reaney and Emma Robinson explore HMRC’s publication, ‘Help with VAT compliance controls—Guidelines for Compliance GfC8’ and consider the implications for businesses. GfC8 was published in September 2024, but its profile has fallen well short of what would be expected for a publication of this level of detail and potential significance. On 25 September 2024 HMRC published ‘Help with VAT compliance controls—Guidelines for Compliance GfC8’. This publication has 10 parts and, if printed, would exceed 40 pages in length. On the landing page for the publication, HMRC states: “These Guidelines for Compliance (GfC) set out HMRC’s recommended approach and are designed to help you understand our expectations as you plan, carry out, and review the accounting and compliance processes that ensure VAT is accurately declared by your business.” In this article we have summarised, at a high level, the content within the publication. This summary is not intended to provide knowledge of the detail but rather act as a series of prompts to spark the reader’s interest in exploring it further. We expect that many of these concepts should be familiar to larger businesses but perhaps less so for small or medium sized ones. In our experience the existence of this guidance is not widely known and with HMRC’s clear statement around expectations, especially in an environment of increased audit activity, it is important for businesses to ensure they have considered the application of this guidance to their business. 1. Overview—Key Takeaways In our view, the best way to understand and digest the content is to start with two key messages which are threads running through the content. HMRC expect businesses to have written processes and procedures for their VAT compliance. HMRC expects VAT to be included in an overall tax control framework which should include risks identified, controls to address the risks, an identified owner of the risks and processes to monitor the risks and the response on an ongoing basis. In our experience many businesses still do not have detailed written procedures for VAT compliance and a range of different approaches to tax control frameworks is applied. Given HMRC’s assumption that the ‘digital journey’ under Making Tax Digital for VAT is able to be evidenced, e.g. by flow diagram, we expect almost all businesses will have work to do to meet the HMRC expectations as outlined in GfC8. 2. Summary of Guidelines for Compliance GfC8 The guidelines encompass a range of topics designed to cover the tax compliance process and are set out into 10 different parts. The best way to understand how these fit together is to split them into (i) topics focused on the end-to-end VAT compliance process and (ii) topics which have been identified as specific risks within that process. A. End-to-end process 1. Purpose, scope and audience The guidelines are for UK VAT registered businesses who use invoice accounting, meaning they account for VAT when invoices are issued and received (essentially this will be all VAT registered businesses aside from those operating special schemes, e.g. cash accounting). They provide the taxpayer with HMRC’s recommended approach and are designed to help the taxpayer as it carries out and reviews the accounting and compliance processes to ensure VAT is accurately declared. 2. General approach to VAT compliance controls This section provides information on good practices to help manage VAT accounting and compliance processes which includes (but is not limited to): Risk management; Control design considerations; and Documentation for internal controls. 3. Order-to-cash The overall control objective of Order-to-Cash (‘O2C’) is the timely, complete and accurate recording of transaction and payments. O2C represents the typical set of business functions used to manage Business to Business customer orders from sales order, fulfilment, billing, customer payments and recording transactions in financial accounts.  4. Procure-to Pay The overall control objective of Procure-to-Pay (‘P2P’) is the timely, complete and accurate recording of transactions and payments received. P2P represents the typical set of business functions used to manage Business to Business purchasing processes and include purchase orders, receipt of supply, tax invoice being received, credit notes and discount adjustments and supplier payments. 5. Record to report Record to report (‘R2R’) is an accounting process which involves collecting, processing and presenting information to provide strategic, financial and operational analysis. It also covers the steps involved in preparing and reporting the overall accounts. R2R covers both external and internal reporting and generally, the R2R function is not engaged in processing transactions but instead focuses on the aggregation of existing data to meet reporting requirements. B. Specific risk areas identified 6. Employee expenses Often viewed as a high-risk area by HMRC, expenses processes exist for capturing, authorising and paying various kinds of reimbursed business costs to employees. HMRC has set out guidance for various control points on employee expenses relating to the system configuration, the expense process, business entertainment and auditing the expense claims. 7. VAT reporting Relevant for business who adopt invoice accounting, it includes detail on VAT reporting control objectives for the following categories (note this list is not exhaustive): Organisational unit structure, General ledger posting, Making Tax Digital for VAT regulations, VAT reports, Consolidation of return figures, and Manual adjustments.  8. VAT reporting—manual adjustments Manual adjustments to VAT reporting can occur for different reasons including consolidation of totals from separate business functions or systems. HMRC have included detail on control objectives for common types of adjustments including adjustments for errors and corrections, how to deal with one-off or irregular supplies such as disposal of assets, adjustments under the capital goods scheme or partial exemption restrictions and bad debt adjustments. 9. Outsourcing Businesses processes such as IT services, legal services, financial and accounting services can be outsourced as well as the businesses VAT compliance function. Even where the business chooses to outsource some functions this does not outsource the risk, and legal responsibility remains with the commissioning organisation. 10. Next steps It is expected that businesses may recognise new elements of good practice and it is HMRC’s view that implementing the guidelines can lead to improvements in systems and processes. Businesses are encouraged to take proactive steps to ensure compliance which might include: Reviewing and updating record-keeping practices; Implementing internal compliance audits; Developing a compliance strategy; Engaging with HMRC; and Stay informed about penalties.  3. Conclusion Despite its low profile to date, this guidance marks a key development in the UK's tax compliance landscape. By outlining clear expectations and emphasising the importance of transparency, accountability, and communication, these guidelines aim to foster a more compliant and efficient business environment. Businesses should take proactive steps to align with these guidelines, ensuring that they are well-prepared. With careful planning, businesses can navigate the new compliance framework successfully and avoid potential penalties for non-compliance. Referring back to the two key messages outlined above, we would encourage businesses to review internal written processes on controls and the overall tax control framework to ensure that these would at least meet, if not exceed, HMRC’s expectations. Perhaps the best way to assess your current position is to consider how you would demonstrate that you meet HMRC’s expectations should you be asked to do so in a VAT visit in the near future. Finally, we would encourage particular attention is paid to the specific areas of risk such as employee expenses. If you have queries about any specific section, please contact us. David Reaney FCA, CTA, is Indirect Tax Partner at KPMG Emma Robinson CTA, Indirect Tax Associate Director at KPMG

Apr 11, 2025
READ MORE
Tax
(?)

VAT Matters – March 2025 – The Latest EU and Irish VAT Developments

David Duffy discusses one Irish High Court case in relation to VAT waivers of exemption, as well as Revenue manuals on various matters. Right to deduct VAT In Killarney Consortium v Revenue Commissioners [2024] IEHC 732, the High Court upheld a decision of the Tax Appeals Commission (“TAC”) that a property owner was not liable to a clawback of VAT previously reclaimed as the relevant provisions of Irish VAT law were held to be in breach of EU law. The judgment considered the Irish VAT rules regarding waivers of exemption from VAT on lettings of property. A waiver was an election made by a landlord before 1 July 2008 to charge VAT on its lettings of property with a term of less than 10 years. While no new waivers could commence from 1 July 2008 onwards (as new VAT on property rules became effective on that date), pre-existing waivers continued to apply to lettings in property which had been acquired by the lessor before 1 July 2008. In addition, the legislation continued to provide for a clawback to Revenue of the excess of any input VAT reclaimed over output VAT paid in connection with a waiver, when it was subsequently cancelled. It was these waiver cancellation provisions that were the specific focus of the case. The taxpayer, Killarney Consortium, (the “Consortium”) purchased a property in 2004 for development and letting. The Consortium exercised the waiver of exemption and reclaimed VAT on the purchase of the property and associated costs. However, due to the property market downturn, the property remained vacant for significant periods and the VAT charged on rents was significantly less than the VAT reclaimed. The Consortium sold the property in 2017 at a significant loss. While was paid on the sale of the property, the VAT originally reclaimed still exceeded the VAT paid by approximately €590,000. Irish law provides that where a waiver has been exercised and is subsequently cancelled a clawback of the deficit is payable. Consequently, Revenue issued an assessment to the Consortium for the deficit amount. The Consortium appealed against the Assessment on the basis that the property had only and ever been used by it for taxable activities. It argued that EU VAT law made no provision for a clawback of VAT merely because the level of input VAT deducted exceeded the level of output VAT paid. The TAC had found in favour of the Consortium and determined that the assessment should be reduced to zero. The High Court, in upholding the decision of TAC, confirmed that where a business is fully engaged in taxable supplies (i.e. supplies of goods or services subject to VAT) it has a right to deduct input VAT incurred on purchases used for the purposes of those taxable supplies. This right to deduct arises irrespective of whether VAT charged on supplies exceeds VAT incurred on purchases. Provided VAT is chargeable on supplies, there is a right to deduct VAT incurred on costs associated with those supplies. The High Court held that the waiver cancellation was in these circumstances contrary to EU law and the principle of fiscal neutrality. The High Court referred to several cases of the Court of Justice of the European Union in support of its conclusion, including for example Feudi di San Gregorio Aziende Agricole SpA (C-341/22), where it was held that the right to deduct VAT cannot be limited by future economic performance. As such, the High Court upheld the decision of the Commissioner to disapply section 96(12) and reduce the Assessment to zero. We are not yet aware if the judgment will be further appealed by Revenue to the Court of Appeal. Revenue guidance updates Revenue have issued a number of new or updated guidance notes in relation to VAT since 1 January 2025. eBrief No. 001/25 updated the Tax and Duty Manual (“TDM”) on the management of special investment funds. This includes reference to changes in Finance Act 2024 which updated the definition of special investment funds to clarify that an alternative investment fund (“AIF”) managed by an Irish alternative investment fund manager (“AIFM”) comes within the scope of the VAT exemption for fund management. eBrief No. 001/25 issued a new TDM on the VAT treatment of heat pump heating systems. This again ties back to Budget 2025 and Finance Act 2024 changes to introduce the reduced 9% VAT rate to the supply and installation of heat pumps. The TDM notes that, “[t]he supply and installation of a heat pump heating system can include key equipment such as heating controls, radiators, underfloor heating emitters and the associated pipework where required to facilitate the effective/efficient operation of a heat pump.” eBrief No. 051/25 issued a new TDM on the VAT treatment relevant to taxi drivers. This confirms that while taxi services are exempt from VAT, VAT can nonetheless arise on related supplies such as taxi radio charges and facilitation fees charged by online platforms. David Duffy FCA, AITI, Chartered Tax Advisor, is Indirect Tax Partner at KPMG

Apr 11, 2025
READ MORE
Tax
(?)

New tax year, new rules

Leontia Doran takes a look at the key tax changes which take effect from April 2025 and looks ahead at what we can expect in the coming years.    The new tax and financial year always sees a plethora of previously announced tax technical and administrative changes; 6 April 2025 and the start of the new Financial Year 2025 on 1 April 2025 are no different. This article aims to provide a flavour of the key changes taking effect from April 2025 and looks ahead to some major changes in the coming years. Employer National Insurance Contributions (NICs) From 1 April 2025, employers are required to pay an increased rate of the National Minimum Wage and just days later from 6 April, a range of changes to employer NICs is resulting in higher wage bills. From 6 April 2025, the rate of Employer NICs increased from 13.8 percent to 15 percent and the 0 percent Employer NICs threshold reduced from £9,100 to £5,000, although the Employer NICs employment allowance increased from £5,000 to £10,500. These increased Employer NICs costs rise more sharply for businesses with lower-income employees which particularly impact on businesses who rely on part time staff such as in the retail and care sectors but especially for hospitality businesses. End of the non-domicile regime From 6 April 2025, the rules for the taxation of non-UK domiciled individuals, and specifically the remittance basis (RB) for foreign income/gains, came to an end. However, any foreign income/gains that arose on/before the 5 April 2025 which fell under the remittance basis are taxed under the previous rules when remitted. The concept of domicile as a relevant connecting factor in the UK tax system has now been replaced by a tax residence-based system. The new regime provides 100 percent relief on foreign income/gains for new arrivals to the UK in their first four years of UK tax residence provided the individual was not resident in any of the 10 prior consecutive years. For Capital Gains Tax (CGT) purposes, past remittance basis users are able to rebase foreign assets held on 5 April 2017 to the value at the disposal date provided they were non-UK domiciled up to 5 April 2025. A new Temporary Repatriation Facility (TRF) is also available for individuals who previously claimed the RB. This enables them to designate and remit at a reduced tax rate foreign income/ gains prior to 6 April 2025. The TRF is available for a limited period of three tax years commencing in 2025/26 at a 12 percent rate for the first 2 years and 15 percent in the final year. The domicile-based system of Inheritance Tax (IHT) has also been replaced with a new residence-based system for long-term residents owning non-UK property not previously within the scope of UK IHT. An individual is long-term resident when they have been UK tax resident for at least 10 of the previous 20 tax years and they will remain as such three to 10 years after becoming non-resident.  Business asset disposal relief (BADR) and Investors’ Relief (IR) As a result of the increased rates of CGT from 30 October 2024, BADR and IR both increased from 10 percent to 14 percent from 6 April 2025 and both will further increase to 18 percent from 6 April 2026. The lifetime limit (LL) for BADR remains at £1 million. In contrast, the LL for IR reduced from £10 million to £1 million for all qualifying disposals made on or after 30 October 2024. To compound these phased increases, anti-forestalling rules aim to limit potential planning in this area. Treatment of double cab pick-ups (DCPUs) From 1 April 2025 for Corporation Tax and 6 April 2025 for Income tax and NICs purposes, HMRC treats most DCPUs as cars, and not vans, for direct tax purposes. HMRC has therefore changed its policy on these vehicles potentially leading to increased tax bills for employers, employees and businesses. Previously HMRC treated a DCPU with a payload of one tonne or more as a van for the purposes of benefit-in-kind calculations, capital allowances, and certain deductions from business profits. In so doing, HMRC was following the definitions of ‘car’ and ‘van’ that apply for VAT purposes. From April 2025, a vehicle will therefore only be treated as a van if the construction of the vehicle at the time it was made means that it is primarily suited for the conveyance of goods. Tax reporting requirements At the start of each new tax year, HMRC’s self-assessment returns get a bit of a makeover to reflect any changes to legislation. This year, those changes will not only reflect some previously announced decisions but also help deal with late rate changes. CGT rate changes Last October, the Chancellor announced that for gains on assets other than residential property, the basic rate of CGT rate increased from 10 percent to 18 percent, and the higher rate from 20 percent to 24 percent with effect from 30 October 2024.  At that point HMRC had already updated the 2024/25 SA100 return therefore unrepresented taxpayers must use a HMRC calculator to calculate and report an adjustment figure to get the correct CGT position in their return. Agents using commercial software should check that this is reflected correctly in their client’s return.  For trustees/personal representatives, a new adjustment box will be added to that return and a similar calculator will be provided for taxpayers. As a result, HMRC has requested that trusts/estates wait until the 2024/25 SA900 return is published to ensure that the correct rate of CGT is used. Cryptoassets For the first time, individuals with cryptoassets are required to report income/gains arising on these transactions separately on their return. A policy first announced by the previous Chancellor in 2023, this aims to assist HMRC in making use of the data it expects to start receiving from 2027 about these transactions. 2025/26 tax returns  New regulations also bring in further changes for 2025/26. If an unincorporated business commences/ceases in the tax year, the taxpayer must include the date of commencement/cessation in their return. This could prove challenging in scenarios where the relevant date is not easily determined, for example where an individual has been trading under the trading allowance and first needs to begin reporting trading income. Also from 2025/26, director’s receiving dividends from close companies must include the following in their return: Name and registered number of the company; Amount of dividend received from the company (declared separately from other dividends); and Details of the highest percentage of share capital held in the year. Looking ahead It’s also important to look ahead and plan for what future changes are hurtling down the tax tracks at us. 2026/27 will be another exceptional year for tax practitioners with a wide range of changes previously announced and already expected to take effect from 6 April 2026. Mandatory payrolling of benefits in kind In January 2024 the previous Government announced that from 6 April 2026 employers will be required to report and pay Income Tax and class 1A NICs on most benefits in kind (BIKs) in real-time via the employer’s full payment submission, effectively introducing mandatory payrolling of BIKs. Feedback provided to the Government about this change mainly centred around the potential for increases in employer administrative burdens in relation to reporting all BIKs in real-time and that due to potential delays in receiving invoice details of BIKs provided by third parties, accurate real-time reporting would not be possible for invoices received after the end of provision of the benefit. As a result, the Government has announced some amendments as follows:  the real time reporting of and payment of tax on BIKs will not commence from April 2026 for employment related loans and accommodation but will for all other BIKs with voluntary payrolling available for these BIKs from April 2026, The P11D/P11D(b) process will still be available for those that do not want to voluntarily payroll employment related loans and accommodation which will be mandated in due course, an end of year process will be introduced to amend the taxable values of any BIKs that cannot be determined during the tax year. However, the taxable values of most BIKs will still need to be reported as accurately as possible during the tax year, and HMRC will continue to monitor the penalty position in 2026/27 whilst employers get used to the new process of reporting BIKs in recognition that there will inevitably be a period of adjustment in the first year. IHT future changes The Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in the 2024 Autumn Budget that following the April 2025 changes to IHT territoriality, there would be further significant changes to IHT in the next two tax years.  Firstly, controversial reforms were announced to the IHT reliefs, agricultural property relief (APR) and business property relief (BPR) which are expected to commence from April 2026. A new £1 million allowance will apply to the combined value of property that qualifies for 100 percent BPR or 100 percent APR or both. After this £1 million allowance has been exhausted, relief will apply at a lower rate of 50 percent to the combined value of qualifying agricultural and business property, effectively resulting in a 20 percent rate of IHT. The Government has already stated that it will not be consulting on this policy change, however a technical consultation is expected to take place on the draft legislation and a consultation is currently open seeking views on aspects of the application of the £1 million allowance for property settled into trust. Chartered Accountants Ireland has already discussed its concerns in relation to these proposals with HMRC and has highlighted the particularly damaging impact for Northern Ireland businesses and farms. Secondly, the Budget announced that from 6 April 2027 most unused pension funds and death benefits will be included within the value of a person’s estate for IHT purposes. Pension scheme administrators will also become liable for reporting and paying any IHT due on pensions to HMRC. Making Tax Digital (MTD) for Income Tax MTD for Income Tax is now less than a year from commencement with the first quarterly returns due to be submitted to HMRC on or before 7 August 2026. From 6 April 2026, the first phase of mandation for this major project commences for unincorporated businesses and landlords with total gross income from self-employment (excluding partnership income) and property in 2024/25 exceeding £50,000. Those with total gross income exceeding £30,000 will be mandated from 6 April 2027. Other income sources are not counted when assessing if the MTD turnover limit for mandation has been breached. In the Autumn Budget, the Government announced that the total gross income limit will drop to £20,000, the timeline for which will be set out at a later date within the current Parliament with no timeline currently set for the mandation of partnerships. Currently, taxpayers can voluntarily sign up to participate in testing MTD for Income Tax ahead of mandation. If a taxpayer is exempt or chose not to sign up voluntarily during the testing period, they must continue to report income and gains in a Self-Assessment tax return. If certain conditions are met, a taxpayer may be automatically exempt from MTD and does not need to apply for an exemption. MTD requires mandated taxpayers to: maintain digital accounting records in a software product/spreadsheet (paper records will not satisfy the legislative requirements), and submit quarterly updates to HMRC by the seventh day of the month after each quarter end (5 July, 5 October, 5 January and 5 April unless calendar months are elected for), and finalise their tax position after the end of the tax year (the final declaration is due by 31 January after the end of the tax year). Quarterly updates must be submitted using functional compatible software which can interact with HMRC's API (application program interface). This will require the taxpayer to either purchase a suitable commercial software product or appoint an agent to submit information to HMRC on their behalf using such software. Quarterly updates are intended to be a simple summary of transactions and a final, year-end return will also be required within which any tax and accounting adjustments will be made. The due dates for paying tax will be unchanged. Agents and taxpayers should take action now to prepare for this major change and consider signing up voluntarily to testing in 2025/26 which is subject to a number of eligibility conditions. Agents should also plan ahead and consider the impact on their practice and the steps needed to prepare both their business and their clients. Leontia Doran is UK Tax Manager and Tax NI Subject Lead for Student Education with Chartered Accountants Ireland. Email: leontia.doran@charteredaccountants.ie

Apr 11, 2025
READ MORE
Tax
(?)

SURE—the neglected relief

Maura Ginty of Gintax discusses the Start-up Relief for Entrepreneurs. She explains how this all too often overlooked relief is potentially extremely valuable to new-stage entrepreneurs leaving employment to commence their own business venture.  Start-Up Relief for Entrepreneurs (SURE) is an Irish income tax relief targeted at founders of new businesses who leave employment to start their own company full time. The relief works so the individual can receive a refund of Irish income tax paid over the prior seven years on an investment in their new company. A total of twenty-seven individuals claimed the relief in 2022, with only a slightly higher number of claimants in 2021 and 2020.  Anecdotal experience suggests that many more could have been entitled to the relief.  To my mind there are two primary reasons for this—the complexity and the investment requirement.  While in some respects these are valid concerns, they are not insurmountable, and should not be the immediate ‘dealbreakers’ they seem to have become.  This article gives a general overview of the relief and the key provisions that are likely to have an impact in practice. It does not attempt to be comprehensive and is intended to be a general overview to establish potential eligibility. First, some further background on the two challenges noted above. The headline challenges 1. The regime generally / complexity The SURE regime is complex and convoluted.  SURE is drafted as an add-on to the Employment Investment Incentive Scheme (EIIS) rules with the EIIS being the tax incentive scheme for third party individual investors in Irish SMEs. For SURE, a founder needs to meet specific SURE requirements in addition to general EIIS rules. The specific EIIS sensitivities are well trodden by now but to refresh: EIIS is niche area of tax law with any eligible investments triggering a tax risk for the business – even an administrative error can result in full clawback of investor tax relief as a company liability.  The EIIS regime is a form of EU State Aid, with many terms in Irish law imposed directly from EU regulation albeit with no formal definitions attaching to these terms (which would be the norm in Irish tax law). Helpfully, this is one of the few areas of tax law in which a taxpayer may request an advance opinion from the Revenue Commissioners.  However, there is no time limit for Revenue engagement, and this creates further uncertainty for clients (usually in midst of a fundraising round with a 31 December deadline). Notwithstanding the above, in my view, many of the peculiar EIIS sensitivities resulting from EU regulations should not impact a new stage business, such as a SURE company, particularly in cases where a founder was simply an employee with no other business or family business interests. Certainly, there are aspects which will require careful management, such as preparation of a formal business plan, but these should not lead practitioners and their clients to discount a SURE claim. 2. Requirements for founder to invest in share capital Another reason for low take up is the requirement for a founder to invest in actual share capital of the company.  In contrast, the default market practice tends to be the issue of nominal share capital to the founder with any further investment being simply lent by them to the company, as a director’s loan. The latter is straightforward and as the company generates cashflow, the loan can be repaid in a tax neutral manner.  The initial client conversation in relation to SURE usually stops on this topic. However, to my mind, two further factors need to be borne in mind: Where a company is to subsequently seek external investors, then it is often a commercial requirement that any directors loan is converted into share capital at that point in time.  In many cases, at that stage it is too late to claim SURE in relation to the founder investment. Even after a SURE investment, it is still possible for the founder to take a salary from the company which will enable them to finance their day to day living expenses at startup stage. While salary is taxable income, it should be noted that the effective Irish tax rate for a single individual on a €30,000 salary is circa 12 per cent (being USC, PRSI and income tax after credits). This can be contrasted favourably with SURE tax relief which now can result in maximum refund of up to 50 per cent of the amount invested. Overview of the relief On paper, the relief appears generous with a maximum relief in any single tax year of €140,000 but this can potentially be claimed over 7 separate years. As a result, technically a single cash investment of up to €980,000 would be eligible for relief.  The relief ideally suits an individual who had a substantial employment income in recent years (such as share option gains, termination payment or even simply a significant salary), has no other business interests and wishes to commence a new business. Tax relief available There were significant changes introduced to the EIIS regime, effective from 1 January 2024 as a result of amendments to the underlying EU regulation. Prior to this, the quantum of tax relief available was at a person’s marginal rate (up to 40 percent) for qualifying investments, subject to an overall cap. The new changes result in varying amounts of relief, depending on the particular stage of the business life cycle.    These changes now apply to SURE investments. I would expect that most qualifying SURE claims could be eligible for tax refunds at up to 50 per cent or 35 per cent of the amount of investment. The differing rates apply as follows: Where the company is not yet operating in any market, the rules operate so that an income tax refund of up to 50 per cent of the investment could be available (relief is available at 125 per cent of the amount invested;  the marginal income tax rate is 40 per cent).  The term “not operating in any market” derives from EU regulation and Irish Revenue regard this as an operation that has not yet made its first commercial sale.  Where a company is operating in a market, then a tax refund of up to 35 per cent could be available (relief available at 87.5 per cent of the amount invested). For the reliefs noted above (50 per cent and 35 per cent), the investment would need to be classified as “initial risk finance” which relates to early-stage companies (as defined). Most SURE eligible investments should be in this “initial risk” category. However, there is a technical provision for a lower rate to apply. In the context of the terms above, the requirements (as to first commercial sale/initial risk finance, etc.) technically need to be met by all entities within an “RICT group”—a concept derived from EU Regulation.  Further, many other EIIS conditions apply by reference to this concept. For SURE specifically, I would expect that a newly established business owned by an individual who had been in long term employment (with no other business interests) to be a standalone “RICT group”. Thus, the references in this article are to a singular company. SURE – headline conditions The key conditions for SURE are:  A company must be established carrying on a new business. There is two-year window to make the SURE investment and it must be made by 31 December in the second year after the company’s incorporation. The trade activity must be new, and the company cannot have taken over an existing trade, such as a sole trade.  The individual must: Have mainly employment (PAYE) income in the previous four years. Take up full-time employment in the new company - an existing employment can be retained for up to 10 hours per week (there is no stipulation as to salary level). Invest cash in the new company by acquiring shares - there is also a provision for relief on conversion of existing directors’ loans within a certain timeframe (this route will require an auditor’s statement). Retain the shares for at least four years. Hold at least 15 percent of the shares in the company. Not hold more than 15 percent of any other company (this requirement can rule out many employees who have had other business ventures). There is a requirement that the company carry on “relevant trading activities”—this definition includes most trades apart from those on an “excluded” list. Excluded trades include financing activities, professional services, and land dealing. Professional services are specifically defined and include legal, accounting and medical services.  The exclusion does not extend to engineering or computer programming. “Research and Development and Innovation” activities may also be permissible. The relief could apply to new tech startups or also to those entering traditional sectors, including consultancy services.  Specific EIIS requirements for SURE investments Qualifying company The company will need to be regarded as a “qualifying company” which is the same requirement as the current EIIS rules. This involves tests such as being an SME, satisfying the “undertaking in difficulty” test, and the requirement to have tax clearance. The conditions can be limiting—especially the requirement that the company cannot be under the control of another company—limiting flexibility for founders, or other controlling shareholders, with a holding company structure often their preference.  Qualifying investment Similarly, the EIIS “qualifying investment” requirements will need to be met—key here is that the money must contribute directly to the creation or maintenance of employment.  While the EIIS conditions requiring there to be no arrangements to reduce investor risk are still applicable, in practice they should not cause any commercial difficulty for a founding shareholder. The investment must be based on a business plan. In drafting the plan, consideration should be given to the scenario where EIIS is either to be offered or potentially offered to new external investors. Administrative requirements / clawback risk There are administrative requirements which need to be met including submission of a specific tax return (RICT return) by the company and provision of a Statement of Qualification (SQSURE3) to the founder. The actual technical administrative requirements are not unduly onerous, but it is critical they are met. Similar to EIIS, there is a provision which deems clawback of tax relief to be a liability of the company in certain cases, e.g. where the Statement of Qualification is incorrect, such that the company will not be considered a “qualifying company”. Summary In conclusion, while SURE relief offers significant potential benefits for founders of new businesses, its complexity and specific requirements (outside of commercial norms) have clearly limited the uptake. There has been much lobbying of Government to simplify the entire suite of investment reliefs, with particular focus on the prohibition of a holding company and for SURE specifically, its restriction to employees only. Given the lack of success to date, one would suggest that all stakeholders reconsider the SURE rules as they stand—especially for cases where founders are satisfied to progress with a standalone company. One also hopes the soon-to-be updated Irish Revenue guidance documentation on SURE/EIIS will better assist all parties navigate matters here. Maura Ginty is a Chartered Accountant and Chartered Tax Advisor with over 20 years of professional experience advising clients. She advises Irish and international businesses at all stages of development from start-up, expansion in Ireland and abroad, acquisition, day-to-day operations, and restructuring to succession and disposal.

Apr 11, 2025
READ MORE

Institute publishes CSRD Technical Release

On April 8th, the Institute published Technical Release TR 01/2025 Guidance on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). This Technical Release covers the application of the CSRD in Ireland, including; An introduction to the CSRD Transposition of the CSRD in Ireland Scoping and timelines The Technical Release covers the CSRD legislation as currently drafted in Ireland. It does not address the potential implications of the recent Omnibus Proposals. This Technical Release is available to members by logging in to the Institute Technical Content section of the website. We hope to update this publication with supplementary content in coming months.

Apr 10, 2025
READ MORE
Ethics
(?)

IAASA publishes a revised Ethical Standard for Auditors (Ireland)

Following public consultation last year, IAASA has published a revised Ethical Standard for Auditors (Ireland). As part of the revisions to the standard, IAASA has also updated its Glossary of Terms. IAASA has also published a feedback paper which summarises its response to the main points raised by the consultation respondents. The effective date of the revised standard is for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after 15 December 2026. Early adoption is permitted. The feedback paper is available here. The responses received are available here. The revised standard is available here. The revised Glossary of Terms is available here.    

Apr 10, 2025
READ MORE
Audit
(?)

IAASB issues revised going concern standard for auditors

The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) has released its revised International Standard on Auditing 570 (Revised 2024), Going Concern. The revised standard responds to corporate failures that raised questions regarding auditors’ responsibilities by significantly enhancing the auditor’s work in evaluating management’s assessment of an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. The revise standard is effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after 15 December, 2026. ISA 570 (Revised 2024) introduces several key changes: Robust risk assessment. Auditors must conduct, in a more timely manner, thorough risk assessments to determine whether events or conditions are identified that may cast significant doubt on the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. Evaluating Management’s Assessment. Auditors must evaluate management’s assessment of going concern irrespective of whether events or conditions are identified. In doing so, auditors must consider the potential for management bias and evaluate the underlying method, significant assumptions, and data used when management formed its assessment. Additionally, auditors must evaluate whether management’s judgements and decisions indicate potential bias. Extended date of evaluation period. The auditor’s evaluation period for going concern now extends at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements, contributing to an assessment of more relevant, decision-useful information. Enhanced transparency. The standard requires clearer communication in the auditor’s report about the auditor’s responsibilities and work related to going concern and strengthened communications with those charged with governance and external parties. The IAASB also developed a fact sheet and Basis for Conclusions, which are available on the IAASB’s website. The IAASB will also issue a frequently asked questions document and technical overview video to support the revised standard’s implementation.

Apr 10, 2025
READ MORE
Business law
(?)

Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 - Changes in Companies House

The Institute has today published a webpage on Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 - Changes in Companies House.  The aim of this webpage is to inform members of the recent Companies House identity verification changes and how to register as an Authorised Corporate Service Provider. These identity verification requirements came into effect on a voluntary basis on 8 April 2025 and will be mandatory for all company directors and People with Significant Control from Autumn 2025.  It also sets out other changes to be introduced by Companies House at a later date and reminds members of the changes from phase 1 last year.   

Apr 10, 2025
READ MORE
Sustainability
(?)

Sustainability reporting in a shock-prone world - The bigger picture

In a unsettled world in which global temperatures continue to rise, accounting for sustainability has never been more important, writes Susan Rossney  On 26 February 2025, the European Commission proposed changes to the laws governing, among other things, sustainability reporting.  Regardless of any changes to sustainability reporting legislation, there will be little let-up in the momentum of the sustainability policy developments impacting those accountants working to embed sustainability in company strategies and operations. Accountants and sustainability  ‘Sustainability’ is a broad term, defined in 1987 by the United Nations (UN) as: “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.  Financial professionals often describe it as ‘ESG’—i.e. measuring an organisation against specific environmental, social and governance metrics.  The need to gather the data required to measure business performance, and allow investors to compare businesses, is one of the many reasons sustainability has become increasingly important for accountants.  Even before the introduction of legislation compelling disclosure of sustainability information, however, many businesses had been working hard to integrate sustainability into their operations. This is partly because it makes good business sense—reduced energy costs being just one of them—but also because businesses are run by and for people who appreciate that businesses depend on a functioning society. And society, in turn, needs functioning ecosystems—energy, raw materials and a healthy workforce with access to clean air, clean water, food and security.  The risk of the ‘wicked problem’  Climate change and biodiversity collapse are archetypal ‘wicked problems’, a term coined in the 1970s by design theorists Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber. Wicked problems describe planning and social policy problems that seem difficult or impossible to solve. They resist resolution. Like Whac-A-Moles, you hit one part of a wicked problem on the head and another one pops up to surprise you.  Solving wicked problems requires thousands of stakeholders to do “everything, everywhere, all at once,” as UN Secretary-General António Guterres has put it.  With all indicators pointing to a relentless rise in global temperatures, both mitigation (reducing harmful emissions) and adaptation (adapting to the effects of climate change—wildfires, floods, droughts, migration, costs etc) have never been more necessary for businesses to mitigate risks.  Systemic risks Systemic risks are the widespread and interconnected threats posed by the climate and biodiversity crises to the stability of financial systems and the global economy.  These risks include the world reaching so-called ‘tipping points’—levels of global warming and rising sea levels from which there is no return, for example.   A report commissioned by the European Central Bank in 2022 found that climate risk could substantially amplify losses in an interconnected financial system of banks, investment funds and insurers.  In a report published in December 2024, the European Central Bank and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority warned that climate change is increasing the frequency of natural disasters, resulting in multibillion euro costs left uncovered by insurance.  In January 2025, global reinsurer Aon disclosed that economic losses resulting from natural disasters in 2024 totalled $368 billion, marking 2024 as the ninth consecutive year of losses exceeding $300 billion.   Physical risks The physical risks to businesses can be both acute and chronic.  An example of an acute physical risk is a wildfire, such as the Los Angeles wildfires that took place in the US in January, which are likely to be one of the costliest natural disasters in US history.  A chronic risk could be a drought, such as those that cause water shortages in regions in which semiconductors are manufactured—a core component of enabling technologies critical to economic growth, national security and global competitiveness.  Along with the loss of life and suffering of those caught up in these physical events and their immediate and long-term aftermath, there are also risks to business. These include damaged assets, raw materials shortages, environmental degradation (such as those affecting tourism industries), resource scarcity, supply chain disruptions and business interruption.  Transition risks In the context of business and climate change, transition risks are the financial and operational uncertainties businesses face in the shift towards a low-carbon economy.  These transition risks include fluctuating costs and secure energy supply as the economy and societies transition to net zero. They also include increased operating costs for waste management and insurance and exposure to carbon tax liability, which is expected to rise to €100 per tonne of CO2 emitted in Ireland by 2030.  Recent reports from the World Economic Forum warn that climate inaction could cost businesses up to seven percent of annual earnings by 2035. Other risks include reputational risk and a threat to a company’s ‘social licence to operate,’ as well as legal challenges.  In 2024, London’s Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment reported that there are 2,666 ongoing climate litigation cases globally, noting a rise in the number of climate cases filed against companies. Another transition risk for businesses is their potential inability to secure lower-cost funding, as lenders and investors increasingly seek information on sustainability-related risks.  Equally, a company’s existing products or services could become obsolete in the transition, while competitors may gain an advantage by adopting new technologies and attracting or retaining valuable talent as more and more candidates vet companies’ ESG credentials before deciding to join or remain with a business.  This shift in preference towards more sustainably run companies extends to an organisation’s ability to tender for contracts, particularly in the public sector with the rise of green public procurement practices. In Ireland, for example, the Government published Buying Greener: Green Public Procurement Strategy and Action Plan 2024-2027 in April 2024 with the aim of driving green and circular procurement practices across the public sector. With annual public sector purchasing accounting for 10 to 12 percent of Ireland’s gross domestic product, this plan will likely influence a significant portion of economic activity and demand.  Regulations and policies Businesses must carefully consider sustainability-related regulations and policies that affect every level of the economy, from international to local. At the international level, treaties such as the Paris Agreement and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework join supranational policy initiatives, such as the EU Green Deal and EU Biodiversity Strategy, to ensure specific climate action and biodiversity protection commitments cascade to the national policy level.  Sustainability is one of the core pillars of Northern Ireland’s 10X Strategy where the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 requires at least 80 percent of electricity consumption in the region to be from renewable sources by 2030.  The Northern Ireland Executive’s Programme for Government 2024-2027, Our Plan: Doing What Matters Most, prioritises the development of a globally competitive and sustainable economy while also focusing on protecting the environment.  The UK government recently published its National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan in which it commits to achieving all 23 targets of the Global Biodiversity Framework at home. More recently, the UK government published the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs’ Corporate Plan for 2025-2027 which sets a strategic direction for its path towards a transition to a net-zero, nature-positive future. Ireland has implemented similar policies to achieve its climate and biodiversity targets through successive Climate Action Plans and sectoral targets for emissions. Additionally, under the fourth National Biodiversity Action Plan, a key objective is to engage 900 businesses in the Business for Biodiversity Ireland initiative by the end of 2025.  Other measures will prevent companies from making misleading claims about the environmental merits of their products and services, while also helping Ireland to transition to a circular economy.  Achieving the legally binding climate targets established under the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2021, which aims to ensure Ireland meets its national emissions reduction targets, is critical from both a financial and a climate perspective.  In December 2024, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council (IFAC) warned that the climate transition poses Ireland’s second largest budgetary challenge, second only to our ageing population.  In a 2025 joint report with the Climate Change Advisory Council, IFAC estimated that failure to meet our climate targets would incur penalties of up to €8 billion for Ireland and €26 billion for Europe. Alongside these policy developments, businesses will be required to gather more climate, nature and biodiversity information this year and beyond — and accountants in  the public and private sectors will play a critical role in managing it.  In a shock-prone world where all indicators point to a relentless rise in global temperatures, accounting for sustainability has never been more crucial.  Chartered Accountants Ireland’s Sustainability Centre offers guidance and resources for businesses. Additionally, members can subscribe to the Institute’s fortnightly Technical Round Up and weekly Sustainability/ESG Bulletins, both included in the weekly Chartered Accountants Ireland newsletter, and on LinkedIn.    Susan Rossney is Sustainability Advocacy Manager at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Apr 10, 2025
READ MORE
Sustainability
(?)

“We want to get people out of the default habit of jumping in the car for every trip”

As the founder of Bleeper, the Dublin-based bike sharing venture, Hugh Cooney, FCA, is playing a crucial role in supporting and promoting sustainable travel in the nation’s capital A 2016 trip to China prompted a career change for Chartered Accountant Hugh Cooney who would go on to launch Bleeper, his Dublin-based dockless bike rental start-up, the following year. “It was when I was in China that I saw the world’s first standalone bike-sharing scheme,” Cooney explains.  “Up until then, it was all bikes at fixed locations. These standalone bikes each had smart locks which were opened by an app. I really liked the concept, and I spent the next four months or so looking at how to bring it to Ireland.” Path to accountancy His foray into sustainable entrepreneurship wasn’t Cooney’s first career shift. Prior to his 2016 trip to China, he had already lived in Shanghai for five years, working for property developer Treasury Holdings, before returning home to train as a Chartered Accountant. “I moved back to Ireland in 2010. The jobs market was tough at the time due to the global financial crisis. I didn’t want to stick with the property business and decided to add a qualification to my CV. I had always been interested in accountancy and had studied it at college,” he says. “I saw that Chartered Accountants Ireland had launched its Elevation Programme in 2009 to enable people to become Chartered Accountants without a training contract.  “I thought it would be perfect for me and signed up for it in 2010. I got a job in PwC’s corporate finance division, did my Final Accounting Exams in 2013 and became a qualified Chartered Accountant.” A subsequent role with KPMG saw Cooney working on aspects of the Irish Banking Resolution Corporation (IBRC) administration.  “I joined KPMG in 2014 and worked on the sale of IBRC non-performing loans in their transaction services division. We had to get the loan book into a condition where buyers were happy with the information provided,” he says. Then came that lightbulb moment in China and the launch of Cooney’s Bleeper business: “I left KPMG in April 2017 and Bleeper opened for business soon after,” he says. The birth of Bleeper The name for Bleeper came to Cooney one day as he was walking past the Luas stop on Dublin’s Harcourt Street.  “I heard the ‘ding ding’ sound of the Luas. The bikes make a bleep sound when they are unlocked, so I decided to call it Bleeper.” Start-up finance came from a mix of sources. “At the start, I had a joint venture with a Chinese company. They contributed the bikes and I raised money from friends and family as well. We started with a thousand bikes and the Chinese company also made the software we used.” Having the bikes, software and finance in place was just the beginning, however. It’s not possible to simply start a bike-sharing business in a city like Dublin without some form of permit or licence.  For Cooney, this ultimately came down to the introduction of a set of bylaws by Dublin City Council.  “Dublin city centre is so complex and there is such competition for road space, Dublin City Council needed to put some rules around it,” he explains, paying tribute to the speed with which council officials and elected members of the Strategic Policy Committee approved the bylaws.  “It usually takes a few years, but they started working on the bylaws in June 2017 and they were approved the following December.” The council then ran a competition for two licences, one of which was awarded to Bleeper. “We were allowed to put our first bike in the Dublin City Council administrative area in June 2018,” Cooney says. Regular Bleeper users can buy a pass, while less frequent users can pay as they go. The pay-as-you-go rate is €1 to unlock the bike and four cent per minute thereafter.  “Our average trip is 17 minutes, and most people pay us €1.68. Under the bylaws, the bikes have to be locked to a public bike rack,” Cooney explains. “We are fined if they’re not locked to the racks, and we pass that on to the customer concerned. There is a chain on the bike which they use to lock it to the rack. Compliance is very good—less than one percent of users don’t follow the rules.” Since its launch, Bleeper has grown to include electric bike leasing and sales divisions. “People can lease a bike just like a car,” Cooney says.  “They pay by the week and can give it back at a week’s notice. We found that some customers want to buy an electric bike, but they are not cheap. The entry level is €2,000 and they can go right up to €5,000.  “We opened a shop on Lower Bridge Street and people can come in and take a bike for a test ride before they buy. Business is good and we’ve been profitable for the last couple of years. We are growing revenue every year and hope to continue on that path.” Mobility Partnership Ireland Bleeper was one of the founding members of Mobility Partnership Ireland (MPI)—a coalition of shared transport providers launched four years ago—and Cooney was recently elected as MPI Chair for the year ahead.  “MPI started with three member firms, including ourselves, Moby and Yuko. We had realised that all commercial operators in the sustainable transport space were meeting the same State officials. It was time-consuming and inefficient. We decided to come together as a collective for lobbying purposes and to promote sustainable transport generally,” Cooney says. Definitions of sustainable transport can vary. “For me, it is anything that is not a single passenger car journey. A car with four people in it isn’t unsustainable. Anything that is not a single occupancy car journey can be sustainable. “If you read the Climate Action Plan, the goal is to enable 500,000 daily sustainable travel journeys by 2030. It’s not realistic to ask people to give up their cars. People have lots of reasons to hold onto their cars.  “But, if it’s a sunny day, we can get them to ask themselves if they need to drive to work that day. It’s not about whether people have a car or an electric vehicle. It’s about the amount of time they use it.” Promoting sustainable transport Cooney believes more should be done to promote the sustainable travel targets set out in the Climate Action Plan. “I don’t see the Government advertising their Climate Action Plan target for sustainable journeys. They need to get out there and break the target down into smaller steps,” he says. Commercially operated sustainable transport services should be supported as part of the this, Cooney adds.  “A lot of people think public transport is publicly owned and funded but there are lots of alternative commercial providers,” he says.  “It needs a bit of a shift in mindset. All of the incentives and subsidies tend to go to publicly owned services, but more consideration needs to be given to commercially operated sustainable transport services.” Since its launch four years ago, MPI has grown to eight member firms, including Aircoach and FreeNow.  “Our plan is to work closely with the Minister for Transport and the National Transport Authority as one group. We want to break down the ‘us and them’ mentality that currently exists,” Cooney says. “We can easily get to the 500,000 trips target in sustainable transport if we all work together, and I believe we can get way more than that if commercially operated sustainable transport services are supported. “We want to work with the government to get more people out of the default habit of jumping in the car for every trip.” It isn’t always easy to get these ideas across to Government, however. “The process of making pre-budget submissions is very costly and time-consuming for businesses,” Cooney points out.  “You don’t get written answers or clarity on why proposals have not been accepted. There should be a downloadable template on the Department of Finance website. That would make it easier for businesses to make submissions and easier for the department to run the process.  “It’s not unreasonable to ask that they make it easier and to give people feedback on their submissions. We have put forward ways of encouraging people to use alternatives to their cars but haven’t got any response.” On a more positive note, Cooney sees lots of potential for Bleeper to grow.  “Less than six percent of people in Dublin commute to work on a bike. In Amsterdam and Copenhagen, it’s closer to 50 percent. The government target for Ireland is 15 percent. Our goal is to play a big role in reaching that target,” he says. Interview by Barry McCall

Apr 10, 2025
READ MORE
Financial Reporting
(?)

The EU Omnibus package and next steps for CSRD reporting

Dee Moran, FCA, explores the potential impact of the European Commission’s much-anticipated Omnibus package on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive  26 February 2025 felt like doomsday for many immersed in sustainability. After weeks of rumours, the European Commission published its first Omnibus package of simplification measures for sustainability reporting and regulation. If approved, these measures will substantially water down the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and EU taxonomy for sustainable activities.   In publishing the proposals, the European Commission noted that they would enable businesses “to grow and create quality jobs, attract investments, get the necessary funds for their transition towards a more sustainable economy and help the EU meet the Green Deal’s ambitious objectives”. Many in the profession were dismayed by the introduction of the new CSRD simplification proposals, however, particularly those that had just published their 2024 annual reports with the required environmental, social and governance (ESG) information included for the first time.  Their companies have invested heavily in sustainability reporting and, depending on their size, could now potentially fall out of scope of the CSRD under the new proposals.   Their less prepared counterparts, meanwhile, will have felt some relief that their own tardiness in starting their sustainability journey and preparing for CSRD reporting has been rewarded. So, where does the Omnibus package leave the future of CSRD reporting? Some of the proposed amendments are outlined here, with a short analysis for each. Timeline: two-year delay The Omnibus measures propose delaying the deadline for CSRD reporting by two years—to 2027 for wave two companies, and 2028 for wave three. The two-year ‘stop the clock’ proposal has generally been welcomed as it would give companies more time to prepare for CSRD reporting.  There are concerns among some, however, that the two-year delay is too long, with some maintaining that a 12-month lag would have been more effective in maintaining momentum. Budgets are already approved for next year, but securing the budget for a second year might be more challenging.   Overall, however, the proposed delay is being viewed as a welcome means to provide a much-needed breather for companies.  Threshold: employee numbers The European Commission’s Omnibus package proposes raising the threshold for numbers employed by companies in scope of the CSRD from 250 to 1,000 (and either a turnover greater than €50 million or balance sheet total exceeding €25 million). This proposal would reduce the number of companies in scope of the CSRD across Europe by about 80 percent—from 50,000 companies down to about 7,000.  The 7,000 figure is also substantially lower than the 11,000 companies obliged to report under the Non-Financial Reporting Directive.  The higher employee threshold proposal has met with varying reactions in the profession, with many expressing that 1,000 goes too far, and that 500 employees and above would be more proportionate. This will no doubt be debated at length in the months ahead.  It is worth pointing out, however, that companies that would not fall in-scope of the CSRD under the new proposed threshold may still opt to voluntarily adopt the proposed standard. Voluntary SME standard The Commission has proposed that it will adopt, by way of a delegated act, a voluntary sustainability reporting standard (VSME) to facilitate reporting of sustainability information by companies that are not in-scope for the CSRD.  This will be based on the revised voluntary sustainability reporting standard for non-listed micro, small and medium enterprises (VSME) submitted by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) to the European Commission in December 2024. Value chain cap The Omnibus measures propose the introduction of a ‘value chain cap’. This move would serve to limit the information CSRD reporters can request from non-CSRD reporters in their value chain with fewer than 1,000 employees. They would not be permitted to request any information exceeding that specified in the revised VSME. While this proposal could potentially diminish the comprehensiveness of sustainability reports, it would also reduce the sustainability reporting burden on smaller companies and—provided that the revised VSME standard is comprehensive—should still provide companies in-scope of the CSRD with the value chain information they need. Reasonable assurance standards The requirement to have assurance on a sustainability report is a fundamental part of the CSRD, with limited assurance in the first instance and the potential to move to reasonable assurance following a review.  The Omnibus package seeks to remove the requirement for reasonable assurance as a means to streamline the reporting process, while also maintaining some oversight.  This proposal has been largely welcomed as it would reduce the cost of compliance for CSRD reporters and would also be less burdensome.  Some stakeholders have, however, voiced concerns that removing the need for reasonable assurance over the longer term may compromise the trustworthiness and reliability of data.  Investors, in particular, have been vocal about their need for accurate data to reduce the risk of greenwashing. Reasonable assurance would provide an additional level of comfort. European Sustainability Reporting Standards The Omnibus package commits to simplifying the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), including a reduction in the number of data points, clarification of provisions deemed unclear and an improvement in consistency with other pieces of legislation. With in excess of 1,100 data points, the volume and complexity of the ESRS has raised many concerns, and Chartered Accountants Ireland was critical of the high number of ESRS data points in our response to the initial public consultation on the draft ESRS.  The Omnibus proposes to simplify the ESRS by reducing the number of data points and focusing on qualitative over quantitative information.  The Commission has asked EFRAG to commence the work of simplifying the ESRS and to provide their technical advice by 31 October 2025. It is important, however, that sufficient time is allowed for proper consultation with stakeholders. Sector-specific standards The Omnibus proposal reverses the existing plan for sector-specific standards to be developed and adopted by the European Commission, a move that would have increased the number of data points required for CSRD reporting.  Again, there are varying views on this proposal in the profession. Some maintain that sector-specific standards would lead to more relevant and meaningful disclosures in specific industries while also providing for more effective comparability.  Others cite increased cost and complexity as a potential negative, particularly for companies operating across multiple sectors.  Double materiality assessment The Omnibus proposal does not change the CSRD’s double materiality perspective, meaning that companies remaining in scope will have to report on how sustainability risks affect their business and their own impact on people and the environment. The retention of the double materiality assessment (DMA) is not surprising given that it is a key requirement under the CSRD.  While cost and the availability of data have been cited by some as barriers to completing the DMA, the recommended reduction in ESRS data points and proposed two-year reporting delay should assist reporters in meeting this requirement.      What happens next? It is important to remember that these Omnibus simplification measures are just proposals. The next step will see these proposals reviewed by both the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union.  A staggered approach to the proposed amendments would see the ‘stop the clock’ proposals be approved in the first instance to give companies clarity on their reporting requirements for 2025.  The European Council and the European Parliament have already approved this amendment.  The proposal now needs to be approved formally by the Council and signed by the Presidents of both Institutions. It will then be published in the Official Journal, which is expected by the end of June. Member States have until 31 December 2025 to transpose into their national laws. We have been advocating for speedy transposition of the Directive to the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment , which has committed to prioritising this.  Once the ‘stop the clock’ proposal has been approved, this will allow time for the other proposals to be debated, and for EFRAG to develop and present to the European Commission a revised set of ESRS and a new set of voluntary standards based on the VSME.  The revised ESRS are expected to be adopted as soon as is practicable, but no later than six months after the entry into force of a revised CSRD.  Our professional accounting team at Chartered Accountants Ireland will continue to review these proposals, engage with members, other professional bodies and relevant stakeholders, and respond to European Commission and EFRAG consultations on your behalf. Our priority, as always, will be to represent our members in lending our voice to continued progress in the sustainability agenda that is also proportionate and cost-effective for companies.  While the initial reaction to the Omnibus package of proposals was mixed, it has been encouraging to hear from many in the profession that a reduced scope would allow them to better focus on material matters and on gathering quality data, while the delayed timeline would also give them greater scope to prepare thoroughly for CSRD reporting.  Dee Moran, FCA, is Professional Accountancy Lead at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Apr 10, 2025
READ MORE
12345678910...

The latest news to your inbox

Please enter a valid email address You have entered an invalid email address.

Useful links

  • Current students
  • Becoming a student
  • Knowledge centre
  • Shop
  • District societies

Get in touch

Dublin HQ

Chartered Accountants
House, 47-49 Pearse St,
Dublin 2, D02 YN40, Ireland

TEL: +353 1 637 7200
Belfast HQ

The Linenhall
32-38 Linenhall Street, Belfast,
Antrim, BT2 8BG, United Kingdom

TEL: +44 28 9043 5840

Connect with us

Something wrong?

Is the website not looking right/working right for you?
Browser support
Chartered Accountants Worldwide homepage
Global Accounting Alliance homepage
CCAB-I homepage
Accounting Bodies Network homepage

© Copyright Chartered Accountants Ireland 2020. All Rights Reserved.

☰
  • Terms & conditions
  • Privacy statement
  • Event privacy notice
  • Sitemap
LOADING...

Please wait while the page loads.