Seòmar agus comataidhean

If there is a willingness in the committee to start engaging in that work, I am more than happy to pick that up.

It is certainly a commitment. If the committee would like any additional assurance on the matter, I am happy to consider that.

I recognise those points. Either the changes are minor or consistent with the way in which UK taxes currently operate in Scotland, or they will be the subject of regulations, and there will be an opportunity for detailed engagement and consultation on any regulations that are enacted. I am conscious of the committee’s particular interest in the provision on automation. I also note that the opportunities that we have to introduce primary legislation on tax are infrequent. As such, when an opportunity does arise, it is important that we respond constructively to suggestions from Revenue Scotland. I am conscious that, in raising that point, I have inevitably precipitated questions on a finance bill, which I would be more than happy to respond to should the committee wish to ask about it.

I certainly want to do all that I can to raise awareness of the tax system in Scotland, and I appreciate the exchanges on the issue in the previous evidence session. I recognise that many people will engage with the tax system only when it bites them. The tax system is like many areas of regulation and policy in that, a bit like gravity, we do not really notice it until we have a stumble or, for some reason, we are reminded of it. It is understandable that, for many reasons, people do not have a requirement to engage with it in their day-to-day lives, so it is not a priority for them.

We have touched previously on broader issues around transparency and the information that is provided. I want to ensure that, as a Parliament and certainly as a Government, we communicate about tax in as clear and transparent a way as possible. I recognise that there is always a balance to be struck. Not providing enough detail and pursuing simplicity can mean that information is not fully understood. Providing too much detail can create complexity and some of the salient points can be lost. Therefore, on that broader question, I am always happy to engage with the committee. We have done various bits of work on social media and audiovisual packages, which have been shared, to highlight how the tax system operates in Scotland.

Revenue Scotland touched on the fact that it will be doing a lot of work around engagement with the sector prior to the tax going live. That reflects what happens routinely in the work of Revenue Scotland. For example, in an earlier evidence session, we touched on changes to LBTT and the work that Revenue Scotland is doing to engage with stakeholders, recognising that that is often quite specialist engagement with those who are actively involved, professionally, in the administration of taxes and the provision of advice on them. Revenue Scotland does an excellent job.

With regard to suggestions about how the Government can more effectively communicate changes around taxes and increase public understanding of the tax landscape across the UK and how it applies in Scotland between devolved, reserved and local matters, that is a conversation that I am always up for having.

Clearly, the application of the tax will support those objectives. I am thinking of the original intent of the UK aggregates levy, which goes back to, I think, 2002, as well as the UK Government review of it in 2019—it was published, I think, in 2020—which confirmed what policy intent was being realised through the levy. The tax supports that policy position, which is consistent with the intent of and what has been achieved by the UK levy.

The rate can be an element that influences the degree to which or seeks to—[Interruption.] The rate itself is clearly a specific component. The point that I am trying to make—and I apologise for the lack of clarity—is that the tax, in and of itself, supports the policy objective. Of course, the degree to which the tax supports it will be a reflection of the rate and the behavioural response to it.

Jonathan Waite can answer that.

I understand the point that you are making, and I am conscious of the issue that has been raised by stakeholders. I want to be clear that voluntary set-off with consent is already happening in Revenue Scotland. The other point to state is that we have identified that the introduction of the aggregates tax will increase the number of taxpayers who are active across multiple devolved taxes.

The power that has been highlighted is one that Revenue Scotland has asked for. It is consistent with powers that are enjoyed by HMRC. Revenue Scotland has already used it with consent, and it would allow for more efficient administration of the tax system.

As the member will appreciate, a number of factors can determine the availability and suitability of secondary and recycled materials. The committee will have heard a great deal of detail about that in its visits and engagement. We recognise the essential role that primary aggregates producers play in the Scottish economy and their essential role in delivering on infrastructure and a range of other projects.

On the revenue that is generated, you will be familiar with the OBR forecasts, and one would want to read into that for Scotland over the forecast period. Our focus, as I touched on earlier, is to ensure that we have legislation that provides for the effective administration of the tax and allows future Governments to take decisions, based on the data that they have available, about what the tax rate should be once the power comes into effect.

With regard to the revenue, a number of factors are involved. Revenue is not simply down to the tax itself and the rate at which it is set; it is down to the level of economic activity, macroeconomic conditions, the interaction of BGAs and so on, which I know the committee appreciates.

Good morning, convener, and committee members. As the committee will be aware, the 2014 Smith commission included a recommendation, which was agreed to by all parties, to devolve to the Scottish Parliament the powers that relate to the commercial exploitation of aggregate in Scotland. The Scotland Act 2016 provided for that.

The bill uses those provisions to set out the key elements of a Scottish aggregates tax. In addition, the provisions that are in part 2 are intended to support the efficient and effective collection of all devolved taxes by Revenue Scotland.

The bill’s development has been informed by partnership working between the Scottish Government and Revenue Scotland, as well as extensive stakeholder engagement. In addition to a consultation that ran from September to December 2022, the proposals have been informed by an expert advisory group. I thank all the organisations that have supported and continue to support the development of the legislation and the preparations for the operation of the aggregates tax in the future.

Scottish Government officials, along with representatives of Revenue Scotland, have visited a number of quarries, other aggregate producers and businesses that are focused on the production of recycled materials. I have also visited primary and recycled aggregates businesses and have seen at first hand how they are supporting Scotland’s economic and net zero priorities.

Overall, the provisions set out a Scottish aggregates tax that will broadly align with the United Kingdom aggregates levy and provide for a responsible and proportionate approach to the transfer of powers. The bill takes into account the views that I have heard through the consultation process and the limited data that is available about the operation of the UK aggregates levy in Scotland.

As members may be aware, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs does not hold any Scotland-specific data on the volume of taxable material that is in Scotland or on the volume of material that moves throughout the UK. We are thus reliant on survey data and estimates that are based on production shares. There are, however, some important areas of distinction in the bill, with specific provisions to address compliance concerns relating to unregistered quarries and Revenue Scotland’s ability to take a more tailored approach to tax administration and compliance. In addition, the bill will provide scope for the Scottish Government to take a more distinctive approach to the tax in the future, which will be based on operational experience and an improved evidence base.

The bill is focused on the establishment and operation of the Scottish aggregates tax. As was the case with previous tax legislation, it does not set out a specific tax rate. I appreciate that the committee has a strong interest in what any future tax rate might be. However, the proposed introduction date is two years away, and decisions on any tax rates should be set out as part of the Scottish budget process. We have worked collaboratively to develop the legislation and I want to do the same for the tax rate. I will therefore work closely with stakeholders to inform the setting of the tax rate. Without wishing to pre-empt the process, I will say that stability and continuity will be important considerations as we initially devolve the tax.

The proposals in part 2 of the bill are intended to support the effective and efficient administration of tax by Revenue Scotland. I recognise that there was no formal consultation on part 2 and appreciate the concerns that stakeholders have raised, but the proposals are fully supported by Revenue Scotland and reflect the detailed engagement that has taken place with the tax authority.

I note that the committee recently heard directly from representatives of Revenue Scotland about the benefits of the provisions and how the provisions might be exercised. The proposals include minor changes to create consistency with powers that already apply in Scotland to UK taxes, and measures that will be subject to full consultation prior to any regulations being proposed.

The bill seeks to deliver on cross-party agreement to devolve further tax-raising powers to the Scottish Parliament. It takes account of extensive stakeholder engagement and is intended to support the efficient and effective collection of all devolved taxes by Revenue Scotland. I welcome the committee’s scrutiny of the bill and look forward to our deliberations.

I recognise the challenges that we have with regard to data and what those mean with regard to being able to make assessments and forecasts.

The answers to questions about the revenue that will be raised and how it would compare to the counterfactual position of the UK aggregates levy being maintained UK-wide are dependent on a number of factors such as economic conditions, the block grant adjustment process and decisions taken around the UK aggregates levy, which we are all familiar with through the BGA process. The scenarios will ultimately reflect policy changes and broader economic factors.

I completely accept the point, however, and I have sought to acknowledge from the outset that the limitations that we currently have around data, which can be remedied with this tax coming online, present challenges to our ability to fully assess what the impacts of particular policy choices might be. That, to an extent, underlines the approach that I have set out. If we had a full suite of data and could say exactly what the scenario had been in each of the past X number of years, that would perhaps facilitate a somewhat different conversation. However, we have to operate with where we are at the moment and what we have available. I have set out the work that is being undertaken to address those data gaps.