Daniel Edwards v The Information Commissioner
[2024] UKFTT 571 (GRC)
George Greenwood v Information Commissioner
28 October 2024
[2024] UKFTT 931 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone requested a report about problems with the R&D tax credit scheme. HMRC hid parts, saying it would help criminals. A judge agreed about most of the hidden parts, but said some needed to be released because they wouldn't actually help criminals.
Key Facts
- •George Greenwood appealed an Information Commissioner's decision upholding HM Revenue and Customs' (HMRC's) refusal to fully disclose a 'lessons learned' report on the R&D tax credit scheme under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
- •The report contained information about HMRC's management of the scheme, including details of criminal attacks and fraud.
- •HMRC redacted parts of the report, citing section 31(1)(d) FOIA, which allows withholding information that would prejudice tax assessment or collection.
- •The appeal centered on whether the public interest in transparency outweighed the potential prejudice to tax collection.
Legal Principles
Section 31(1)(d) FOIA is a qualified exemption; the public interest in maintaining the exemption must outweigh the public interest in disclosure.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
The 'prejudice' test for exemptions involves assessing: (a) applicable interests; (b) causal relationship between disclosure and prejudice; and (c) likelihood of prejudice.
Hogan v Information Commissioner [2011] 1 Info LR 588; Department for Work and Pensions v Information Commissioner [2017] 1 WLR 1
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The Tribunal found that while most of the withheld information was likely to prejudice tax collection, some was not. The public interest in preventing further fraud outweighed the public interest in disclosing the remaining information.
HMRC must disclose certain specified information within 35 days.
This information did not meet the threshold for prejudice under section 31(1)(d) FOIA.