Disguised remuneration: Why are we still waiting?
Written by
Alan Kennedy
2 min read
Updated - June 30, 2026
HMRC’s revised settlement terms for disguised remuneration cases remain unpublished, despite earlier indications that they would be released in the spring. For affected taxpayers and advisers, the continuing delay is frustrating and prolongs uncertainty in an area already marked by significant financial and personal strain.
This update considers why revised, workable settlement terms are urgently needed, the unresolved issues arising from HMRC’s 2020 settlement approach, and the hope that the eventual guidance will provide a clearer and more pragmatic route to resolution.
Our earlier article of 26 March 2026, “Disguised Remuneration: has HMRC written to your clients yet?” by my colleague Dan Smitten summarised the findings of the Loan Charge review by Ray McCann published in November 2025. We added our own thoughts on the conflict between the HMRC 2020 settlement terms for disguised remuneration, which often result in individuals being required to pay employer NIC for which they are not legally liable, and how this directly conflicts with HMRCs Litigation and Settlement Strategy.
Despite HMRC stating months ago that it would publish revised settlement terms
“in the Spring”,
these are yet to be seen. This is particularly disappointing in view of the high levels of stress some individuals have been experiencing for years; some have taken their own lives as a result of HMRCs aggressive pursuit of disguised remuneration liabilities.
The government needs money and has indicated extra significant resources are being made available to HMRC to increase tax compliance and collect debts. The continuing delay in publishing pragmatic and realistic settlement terms that allow agreements to be made and revenue to flow to the Exchequer is frustrating for all concerned. The delay may indicate that the settlement terms will be extremely detailed and tailored to different categories of taxpayer and fact patterns, but we must hope there are at least understandable and workable.
Ray McCann’s brief was, broadly, restricted to reviewing the impact of the loan charge on smaller contractor schemes. We sincerely hope however that the time taken by HMRC to publish revised settlement terms means that it is rethinking the ill-advised policy of the 2020 settlement terms that attempts to collect Employers NIC it legally couldn’t, and section 222 liabilities in respect of supposed benefits that were never received for failure to reimburse companies for PAYE they never paid over to HMRC in the first place.
Let’s hope that the summer brings clarity on the situation for those affected. If you would like to discuss a disguised renumeration scheme, please contact one of our specialists.
