HMRC: Guidance issued
Conveyancers have expressed severe disappointment that the government is not shifting on its controversial plan that will require them to register as tax advisers with HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC).
The new requirement is in the Finance Bill 2025-26, which is currently going through Parliament and covers the submission of stamp duty land tax (SDLT) returns by conveyancers.
Exchequer secretary Dan Tomlinson showed no sign of backing down on the issue during the bill’s committee stage in Parliament earlier this month, and this week HMRC issued guidance saying the requirement will come into force on 18 May and advisers will have three months to apply to register.
It stresses that business need to register even if “you do not view yourself as a tax adviser, or describe your work as tax advice” and “helping people with their tax affairs is not your main business function”.
A failure to register could lead to a formal notice to stop providing tax advice and a temporary or permanent ban from being able to register.
Sheila Kumar, chief executive of the Council for Licensed Conveyancers – which wrote to HM Treasury last month urging a change in policy – said: “We are very disappointed that HMRC has not taken the opportunity to make a common-sense change to the regime to exclude conveyancers who are not permitted to give tax advice, but who make SDLT submissions and payments on behalf of clients.”
The requirement would duplicate regulatory oversight of an area of work “where there is no current problem and allowing bad actors to present themselves as registered with HMRC to give tax advice when they have no permission to give that advice to clients”, she said
Speaking before the guidance was issued, Law Society president Mark Evans criticised the government for not making changes to the bill “despite assurances that it would take our concerns into account”.
The Law Society told HMRC last autumn that the regime should be confined to those who routinely acted as agents in relation to a client’s tax affairs or held themselves out as tax advisers.
Those who were already regulated under the Legal Services Act 2007 or an equivalent statutory scheme should ideally be exempt or at least be passported into registration, it said.
“The legislation, as drafted, would encompass conveyancers completing SDLT returns and corporate lawyers drafting commercial contracts between parties or legal documents which include conduct provisions or indemnities/warranties – even though none of those activities include giving tax advice.
“Forcing all residential home buyers to seek separate tax advice will increase the cost of the conveyancing process and the time it takes to purchase a house.
“Indeed, effectively requiring separate tax advice across general practice areas would unduly impact small to medium law firms, and the private individuals and families who commonly access them.”
There would be “duplication, cost and regulatory confusion – for no added consumer or tax revenue protection”.
Many law firms would either register unnecessarily or cease providing services in any way connected to tax entirely.
This would be “a poor outcome for HMRC, advisers and clients alike, and may lead to adverse consequences for compliance. For example, the short deadlines for SDLT returns could become unworkable if these fall to be completed by the client themselves or they have to procure different advisers to assist them”.
Simon Law, chair of the Society of Licensed Conveyancers, added: “Licensed conveyancers are not tax advisers and are not permitted to provide tax advice. Requiring them to register as tax advisers simply because they submit SDLT returns on behalf of clients is misleading, unnecessary, and fundamentally misunderstands their role.
“We have made our concerns clear to the Chancellor. This proposal risks confusing consumers about the role of conveyancers and undermines the clarity of the existing regulatory framework. Licensed conveyancers are already tightly regulated by the CLC, and there is no justification for duplicating regulation where no problem has been identified.”
Leave a Comment