Question follow-through · 10999
Tax Avoidance
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many Loan Charge and disguised remuneration cases the Government expects to remain unresolved following implementation of the McCann review proposals.
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Treasury
- Tabled
- 17 Jun 2026
- Target answer date
- 22 Jun 2026
- Answer
- 24 Jun 2026 · 7 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
17 Jun 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many Loan Charge and disguised remuneration cases the Government expects to remain unresolved following implementation of the McCann review proposals.
22 Jun 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
24 Jun 2026
Answer published
The new Loan Charge Settlement Opportunity (LCSO) is currently being legislated for and represents a fair and proportionate attempt to provide a route to resolution for those who have not yet been able to settle with HMRC. In turn, this requires taxpayers...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.