The £10bn R&D tax relief scandal: the evidence and the blame

Recent events have highlighted R&D tax credit fraud. However we believe the scale of the problem is much higher than previously reported. We’ve a new analysis suggesting that the total cost of fraudulent and mistaken claims could be £10bn, or even higher. The mystery is how this went on for so long, when plenty of people were warning about it, and why it wasn’t until August 2023 that the rules were significantly tightened.

The consequence is that we as taxpayers have lost a huge sum of money that could have been spent on public services or tax cuts. And many businesses have been misled into making large claims which they will now have to repay.

The history

The modern small business R&D tax relief was created in 2000, with the laudable aim of incentivising R&D investment. The scheme changed a few times over the following years. Then something dramatic happened to R&D tax claims by “small and medium-sized enterprises” (SMEs) in the 2010s.

Here’s the number of claims:1All data from official statistics available here.

And here’s the value of the claims (i.e. the tax benefit to business, and the cost to us/HMRC):

We’d expect to see a step change around 2014/15, as the rules became more generous at that point. And we see that, for both SMEs and large business. However SME claims just keep growing, and growing – and that can’t be explained by changes in the rules.2There were further small changes, but too marginal to drive changes of this magnitude.

HMRC’s analysis of 2020/21 claims (published in July 2023) found that half of all claims were incorrect in at least some respect. One quarter of claims were fully disallowed. Another 10% were fraudulent (5% by value). For SMEs, HMRC estimated that 25.8% of all claims by value were wrong or fraudulent. For large companies, 4.6%.

This is a very high rate of error and fraud. For comparison, across the tax system as a whole, the fraud rate is around 1% and the error rate around 3%.

HMRC’s accounts for 2022/233See section 5.1.5 starting on page 256. and 2023/24 4See section 4.1.5 starting on page 241. included estimates of the total cost of R&D fraud and errors from 2020/21 to 2023/24. That’s been widely reported as suggesting a total of £4.1bn of wrong and fraudulent claims. However, HMRC only started to systematically analyse R&D claims from tax year 2020/21 – and so the £4.1bn figures does not include fraud and error prior to 2020/21.

Our analysis

We’ve made a very cautious estimate of the total fraud and error from 2013/14 by assuming (prudently) that there was no fraud/error in that year, and that the level of fraud/error then ramped up linearly until it reached the 25.8%/4.6% level in 2020/21.

That results in total fraud/error losses looking like this:

The total over this period is then £7bn.

But what if the level of fraud/error in 2020/21 had always been there in the past, it’s just that the number and value of claims were smaller? If we apply the 2020/21 figures to earlier years we get this:

And total losses of £10bn.

It could be worse still. A large proportion of the “new” claims after 2014/15 could be bad, with HMRC’s estimate for 2020/21 having undercounted them.

The evidence for undercounting

There are two reasons to believe that HMRC may have been undercounting fraud and mistake.

The first is anecdotal. A large number of unqualified and unregulated businesses have carried on for years, making a good living from R&D tax relief claims. In the last few years their claims have been systematically challenged by HMRC; they weren’t before that. This implies that, historically, dubious claims were missed.

The second reason lies in the HMRC analysis for 2020/21, which includes a table showing fraud and mistake by sector:

It’s important to note that some of these sectors saw many more claims than others:

Looking just at the more significant sectors, the R&D tax reliefs specialists we spoke to were surprised that 58% of the claims in wholesale/retail trade were found by HMRC to be compliant. It would be unusual for a wholesaler or retailer to have any qualifying R&D expenditure. Similarly, the 60% figure for construction looks very high.

Three possibilities:

  • We’re wrong, and there really has been a significant amount of qualifying R&D expenditure in wholesale/retail and construction.
  • HMRC has misclassified businesses.5A business’ “sector” is determined here by a company’s Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code, and this coding is often subjective or inaccurate. For example, Tax Policy Associates Ltd is a “tax consultancy”. It’s also unclear how HMRC allocated businesses which listed multiple different SIC codes.
  • HMRC has missed a significant amount of non-compliance, whether it be from fraud or mistake.

We fear that the anecdotes and the data lead to a conclusion that the true cost to the UK is more than the £7-10bn estimated above. The soaring number of claims from 2015/16 did not reflect more people making claims of much the same quality as before. It reflected many new unqualified firms setting up as R&D tax advisers and making claims of significantly poorer quality than previous claims. The majority of these new claims – which by 2020/21 represented half of all claims by value – may have been non-compliant.

We shared these estimates with HMRC and they didn’t provide any specific comment, but said:

Our recent published estimates are data driven and use a significantly improved methodology. Clearly, the level of non-compliance we have seen is unacceptable and taxpayers rightly expect us to scrutinise claims. That is why we have increased compliance activity. We do that thoroughly and fairly, and the overwhelming majority of valid claims are paid on time.

The scandal

Tax professionals have been of aware of incompetent and fraudulent R&D tax relief claims for years. HMRC must have been aware of the claims too. And HMRC and HM Treasury must have noticed the spiralling number of claims from small business, the increasing number of unregulated firms in the market, and the suspicious sectors for which claims were being made.

So why wasn’t anything done? There was a fraud prosecution for a one-off entirely fake R&D transaction, but there appears to have been little action on what became widespread fraud and error.

Philip Hammond, Chancellor between 2016 and 2019, told The Times that the Treasury and HMRC were well aware of the problem:

We were certainly on it. It was top of the HMRC agenda issue with me. This is probably the single biggest area in percentage terms of fraud and error in the tax system at the moment.”

However nothing much seems to have happened until 2022. It was then that The Times reported that people were treating R&D tax credits as “free money” and making clearly non-compliant claims for, most notoriously, vegan menus. HMRC then conducted its detailed analysis of claims for 2020/21, but it was a year more (August 2023) before more stringent procedures were introduced to discourage frivolous/fraudulent claims.

Why?

We don’t know. But we believe it’s a scandal. We as taxpayers have lost up to £10bn, little of which is likely to be recovered. Many small businesses that made more recent claims will find them challenged by HMRC, and will find themselves out of pocket (with the fees they paid their R&D advisers hard to recover).

It’s been described as the “next PPI scandal” given the number of businesses affected and the large liabilities they have. However, at least with the PPI scandal, the banks ended up compensating the people they’d sold useless insurance. In the case of the R&D tax scandal, most of the small businesses affected won’t receive compensation from anyone. Likely almost all of that £7-10bn is lost to the Exchequer for good. Much of that went as a chaotic and uncontrolled subsidy to small businesses. Some 20-30% of it went as fees to questionable and even fraudulent advisers.

There is now an equally depressing coda: businesses undertaking real R&D projects have had their claims delayed, putting some startups in financial jeopardy.

Who will be held accountable for this?


Thanks to Paul Rosser and T, O and A for their R&D tax credits expertise.

Photo by 50Fish on StockSnap

We welcome comments from readers, particularly where there are technical errors or omissions in our reports. Please try to keep the comments away from political and personal issues, and focussed on the topic of the article or report. Unfortunately we have to have some moderation to prevent spam; the first time you comment there will be a delay until your post is manually moderated (sometimes minutes; sometimes hours or even days). Once you’ve had a post accepted then all future posts should appear immediately.

15 responses to “The £10bn R&D tax relief scandal: the evidence and the blame”

  1. Excellent article! It was sad to learn about the 10BN loss suffered by the UK. This article provided me with some management tips for my own business tax services UK.

    • It’s depressing how right you were. I’ll amend the article to link to your comment, if you don’t mind, because whilst lots of (very reliable!) people have told me they warned about it at the time, there’s not much that’s in writing.

  2. I worked for HMRC compliance upto 2019, and despite what Hammond says I can assure you I never heard of R & D credits being top of the compliance agenda, (or even mentioned at all).

    The top areas at the time were EBT’s, IR35, Brexit (which were having a massive impact at the time on HMRC’s planning) and the office closures.

    As a taxpayer, the people to blame here are the government for not taking on rogue advisors (just like EBT’s), and HMRC for not ensuring or at least telling the government they lacked the experience (at the time) and capability to tackle this (just like, EBT’s, IR35, carousel fraud).

    I just wait for the next thing when it will happen, because I am sure it will.

  3. Working for one of the “large” companies, doing software development, I got annual notes from accounting/legal teams asking for evidence to justify that our department’s work qualified for R&D benefits. And that would include things like patent disclosures and similar. Just “writing product code” was not considered sufficient.

  4. To answer your question; no one. If anyone is to blame it is the politicians who decided that R&D credits, copying others, were a good idea when to police the system properly requires a degree of scientific/technical expertise that is generally no available to HMRC being full of humanities graduates.

  5. The scandal is that HMRC is busy persecuting small businesses over historical claims in relation to complex and innovative software development (cf HMRC v. Get OnBord Ltd), while preferring to ignore large-scale abuse by larger companies where the claims are blatantly bogus.
    It’s not just “delay” as mentioned. Many start-ups have gone to the wall, and livelihoods (and lives) have been ruined.
    Harra admitted in April (to the Treasury Select Committee) that they lack the expertise to evaluate deeply technical claims, but still they persist.

  6. It would also be interesting to see data on how many advisor firms handled the incorrect/fraudulent claims as well as the value of those claims for each of the main players. I remember in 2015 when someone I knew with a creative writing background was recruited to write R&D credit claims for a firm that advertised their “100% success rate” in R&D claims.

  7. The last question would be easier to answer if it was who SHOULD be accountable. The answer there I think is Ministers and in turn HMRC for the incredibly naivety. In essentially offering people money under a ‘apply now, we may ask later’ approach. It just beggars belief.

    This is not the first example, or the largest; the Covid loans and other Covid support schemes were similarly abused. The penalty in most cases seems to be being banned as a director. That will really put off the crooks and scoundrels.

    There needs to be a public enquiry and the rogue agents need to be locked up, a real message needs to be sent that robbing money off the Government is not a soft crime; it hurts us all as a society.

    Change of this kind will need bold action, led from the top (Reeves)and a sweeping away at the top of HMRC. No more gongs for appalling performance; for a start, Harra’s should be handed back, like the post office.

    To answer your question again as you asked it, probably no-one will be held accountable if they keep doing the same stupid things and expecting different result.

  8. As someone who has spent nearly 40 years as a director of various construction companies, I agree that in terms of compliant claims, “the 60% figure for construction looks very high”.

    I have been inundated with emails and calls from various claims companies suggesting that they would submit R&D claims with almost guaranteed success.

    We face multiple technical challenges every day – but it would stretch credibility to argue that overcoming those challenges qualifies as R&D – so thankfully I was not tempted!

    Given the volume of correspondence that I received, which was clearly targeted, I am surprised that the level of claims from construction companies is not higher than the figure shown in your table.

    If 30% of the value of claims have been paid in fees – there should be an unrelenting push to recover the £3bn pocketed by the claims companies – but I won’t hold my breath!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *