Chamber and committees

I will stop there, because a lot of my questions are for HMRC to respond to. I will simply say that there seem to be huge inaccuracies in the calculations for the Scottish rate of income tax and a great deal of work needs to be done to get an accurate Scottish figure.

Continuing on deductions from revenue, in paragraph 1.15 of your report, you note that HMRC has used

“historical data for the UK as a whole to determine patterns of uncollected liabilities and then apportioned an amount relating to Scottish taxpayers. HMRC calculated this to be £97 million”.

In paragraph 1.16, the report refers to gift aid—which is not insignificant. It says that HMRC calculated the deductions

“by estimating the Scottish share of ... tax relief claimed across the UK using historical data. HMRC calculated the Gift Aid deduction to be £114 million for 2020-21 and pension contributions to be £155 million.”

However, it is unclear to me what the pattern across the UK is. It is not really the same. It becomes one amorphous figure when we put it all together, but, when we try to separate things out, take one part and compare it with the other, we find that it cannot be accurate. There must be a margin for error here.

Over a number of years, I have been fairly critical of the quality of information on the Scottish rate of income tax and all the estimates and so on that are around it.

Last year, I drew up a list of 32 areas in which there were estimates—or, more accurately, guesstimates—of what the figures might be. I have not yet had time to do the same with the report that is before us, but I will do so. Looking at it, though, I can see clear evidence that the separate Scottish figures are inadequate to enable an accurate calculation of the tax. At times, there is conflation with UK figures because separate Scottish figures are not available, yet the mix of taxpayers in Scotland is quite different from that in the rest of the UK—particularly when we take London into account, which is hugely distorting. Are the figures that we have on Scottish tax just fantasy?

However, as the auditor, you would have a view on that.

However, paragraph 17 says that

“HMRC ... cannot easily track and monitor compliance activity in Scotland and this affects its ability to collect performance data about the extent of Scottish non-compliance”.

Without data, it is not really possible to project accurately into the future.

If I go through the report and compare what I regard as anomalies with what I took out last year, will I see any improvement?

As the auditor, have you had those conversations with HMRC and the Scottish Government?

Witnesses have raised the issue of the inconsistency of support services across the country. Specifically, they have said that their quality and range is a bit of a lottery. That is particularly true in remote and rural areas, where it seems that there is a limited number of service providers, and that there is poor transport and poor digital connectivity in some places. The Scottish Government has the “no one left behind” model. How can the Scottish Government ensure that minimum service levels are offered while retaining some flexibility?

I have mentioned the obvious comparison between rural areas and urban areas. However, it is reported that there is inconsistency in support across the country, including among urban areas. Do you have any data on that, so that we can compare support in places such as Edinburgh and Glasgow, where, obviously, there are greater concentrations of people who want to use the services?

Do you have any comparative data on provision of services in more rural and remote areas and in urban areas?