The Complexity of Tax Simplification: The UK Experience

  • Simon James


Complexity has long been a feature of taxation in the UK. For instance, the original Act of Parliament introducing the income tax in 1799 was a complex document of some 152 pages so that the government felt it necessary to issue a guide entitled A Plain, Short and Easy Description of the Different Clauses of the Income Tax so as to render it Familiar to the Meanest Capacity (Farnsworth 1951, p. 15).


Fiscal Study Inland Revenue Revenue Authority National Insurance Contribution Community Charge 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adam, S. and Loutzenhiser, G. (2007), Integrating Income Tax and National Insurance: An Interim Report. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
  2. Bowler, T. (2014), The Office of Tax Simplification: Looking Back and Looking Forward, TLRC Discussion Paper 11. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
  3. Butler, D., Adonis, A. and Travers, T. (1994), Failure in British Government: The Politics of the Poll Tax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Committee of Public Accounts (2013), Tax avoidance: the role of large accountancy firms. Forty-fourth Report of Session 2012–13, HC 870Google Scholar
  5. [Accessed 14 May 2015].
  6. Cooper, G.S. (1993), ‘Themes and issues in tax simplification’, Australian Tax Forum, 10, 417–460.Google Scholar
  7. Davidson, C. (1996), ‘An update on the work of the Tax law Review Committee’, Fiscal Studies, 17(2), 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farnsworth, A. (1951), Addington, Author of the Modern Income Tax. London: Stevens & Sons.Google Scholar
  9. Freedman, J. (2013), ‘Creating new UK institutions for tax governance and policy making: progress or confusion?’, British Tax Review, 4, 373–381.Google Scholar
  10. Gibson, J. (1990), The Politics and Economics of the Poll Tax: Mrs Thatcher’s Downfall. Cradley Heath: EMAS.Google Scholar
  11. Gunning, R. (1952), The Technique of Clear Writing New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  12. HMRC (2013), Your Charter, 26 February 2013, [Accessed 11 March 2015].Google Scholar
  13. HMRC (2014), Digital Strategy,–2014/hmrc-digital-strategy–2014 [Accessed 10 February 2015].
  14. HMRC (2015), Income tax statistics and distributions, Table 2.1, [Accessed 6 March 2015].Google Scholar
  15. HM Treasury (2015), Budget 2015. London: Stationery Office, HC 1093.Google Scholar
  16. Inland Revenue (1995a), The Path to Tax Simplification. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  17. Inland Revenue (1995b), The Path to Simplification: A Background Paper. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  18. Inland Revenue (1996), Tax Law rewrite — The Way Forward, [Accessed 9 February 2015].Google Scholar
  19. James, S, (2008), ‘The complexity of tax simplification and reforming the process of tax reform’. Paper presented at the annual conference of the British Accounting Association, Blackpool.Google Scholar
  20. James, S. (2012a), A Dictionary of Taxation, 2nd edn. Cheltenham and Northampton Mass: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. James, S. (2012b), ‘Behavioural economics and the risks of tax administration’, eJournal of Tax Research, 10(2), 345–363.Google Scholar
  22. James, S. (2014), ‘The importance of fairness in tax policy: Behavioral economics and the UK experience’, International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics, 3(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. James, S. and Edwards, A. (2008), ‘Developing tax policy in a complex and changing world’, Economic Analysis and Policy, 38(1), 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. James, S. and Lewis, A. (1977), ‘Fiscal Fog’, British Tax Review, 6, 371–378.Google Scholar
  25. James, S. and Wallschutzky, I. (1997), ‘Tax Law Improvement in Australia and the UK: The need for a strategy for simplification’, Fiscal Studies, 18(4), 445–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. James, S., Lewis, A. and Alison, F. (1987), The Comprehensibility of Taxation: A Study of Taxation and Communications. Aldershot: Avebury.Google Scholar
  27. James, S., Lewis, A. and Wallschutzky, I. (1981), ‘Fiscal fog: A comparison of the comprehensibility of tax literature in Australia and the United Kingdom’, Australian Tax Review, 10(1), 26–36.Google Scholar
  28. James, S., Wallschutzky, I. and Alley, C. (2013), ‘The Henry Report and the taxation of work expenses’, Journal of Finance and Management in Public Services, 11(2), 46–58.Google Scholar
  29. Johnson, P. (2008), ‘The tax system under Labour’, Political Quarterly, 79(S1), 70–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jones, G., Rice, P. Sherwood, J. and Whiting, J. (2014), Developing a Tax Complexity Index for the UK, Office of Tax Simplification, [Accessed 14 May 2015].
  31. McLaughlin, G.H. (1969), ‘SMOG grading-a new readability formula’, Journal of Reading, 22, 639–646.Google Scholar
  32. Mirrlees Review (2011), Tax by Design: The Mirrlees Review (Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  33. Office of Tax Simplification, (OTS), (2010a), Framework Document, [Accessed 14 May 2015].
  34. Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) (2010b), Review of tax reliefs: Interim report. London: OTS.Google Scholar
  35. Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) (2011), Review of tax reliefs: Final Report. London: OTS.Google Scholar
  36. Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) (2015), OTS simplification recommendations: summary at March 2015. London: OTS.Google Scholar
  37. Plain English Campaign (1998), Golden Bull Awards 1998, [Accessed 11 February 2015].
  38. Plain English Campaign (2006), Golden Bull Awards 2006,–2006.html [Accessed 11 February 2015].
  39. Plain English Campaign (2013), Golden Bull Awards 2013, [Accessed 11 February 2015].
  40. Plain English Campaign (2010), ‘Plain English won’t solve this one, but plain common sense is a start’, [Accessed 11 February 2015].
  41. Plain English Campaign (2011), ‘Kick in the Pants’, 2011 Awards, [Accessed 4 February 2015].Google Scholar
  42. Reform of Social Security: Programme for Action (1986), London HMSO Cmnd. 9691.Google Scholar
  43. Salter, D. (2010), ‘The tax law rewrite in the United Kingdom: plus ça change plus c’est la même chose?’ British Tax Review, 6, 671–687.Google Scholar
  44. Sawyer, A. (2013a), ‘Rewriting tax legislation — can polishing silver really turn it into gold?’ Journal of Australian Taxation, 15(1), 1–39.Google Scholar
  45. Sawyer, A. (2013b), ‘Moving on from the tax legislation rewrite projects: A comparison of the New Zealand tax working group/generic tax policy process and the United Kingdom Office of Tax Simplification’, British Tax Review, 3, 321–344.Google Scholar
  46. Smith, P. (1991), ‘Lessons from the British poll tax disaster’, National Tax Journal 44(4, Pt 2), 421–436.Google Scholar
  47. Tax Law Review Committee (1995), Interim Report on Tax Legislation. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
  48. Tax Law Review Committee (1996), Final Report on Tax Legislation. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
  49. Tax Reform Commission (2006), Tax Matters: Reforming the Tax System, Report of the Tax Reform Commission, [Accessed 12 February 2015].Google Scholar
  50. Trevelyan, G.M. (1946), English Social History, 2nd edn. London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar
  51. Ulph, D. (2012), Measuring Tax Complexity, OTS, London. [Accessed 14 May 2015].
  52. Vanistendael, F. (1996), ‘Legal framework for taxation’ in V. Thuronyi (Ed.). Tax Law Design and Drafting, vol. 1. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Simon James 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon James

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations