From Courtrooms to Compromise – Keynote Speaker Peter Nias on the Future of Tax Dispute Resolution
Introduction
At TaxADR, we believe tax disputes don’t have to mean litigation. Our mission is to explore alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in tax matters, offering insights into how mediation, arbitration, and other non-court mechanisms can create fairer, more efficient outcomes.
Founded by Lateef O. Yusuff (Barrister & Arbitrator at The Barrister Group), TaxADR is a platform for thought leadership, discussion, and innovation in tax dispute resolution.
As we approach the TaxADR launch event on 27 February 2025, we’re excited to welcome keynote speaker Peter Nias(Barrister & Mediator at Pump Court Tax Chambers). With a distinguished career in tax law and ADR, Peter will explore the past, present, and future of tax dispute resolution in his keynote address.
Ahead of the event, Lateef sat down with Peter for an exclusive conversation. Here’s what he had to say.
5 Questions with Peter Nias
Q1: Can we confidently say that Tax ADR has come of age, and what key insights from your keynote support this view?
Peter: Yes, we can certainly say that ADR has come of age in the management of tax disputes in the UK. As evidence note the thousands of cases that have been successfully processed using ADR procedures, primarily the use of mediation.
ADR is part of HMRC’s Litigation and Settlement Strategy which was refreshed over 10 years ago to introduce a collaborative dispute resolution (CDR) mindset in the management of tax disputes on the part of HMRC officers as well as taxpayers and their advisors.
This is now firmly part of the way HMRC conduct their business and the Commentary to the LSS sets out in some detail “best practice” procedures for that purpose.
I will explain what CDR entails and how ADR fits into that process at the Tax ADR launch event.
Q2: What, in your experience, are the main ‘challenges’ to the wider adoption of Tax ADR, despite its relative success – such as the 87% success rate in the UK?
Peter: I do not see any “challenges” only “opportunities” in what ADR can offer. However, more awareness is needed of these opportunities through events like the Tax ADR launch and training programmes for all stakeholders.
A successful ADR process produces a win-win result for all; unlike litigation where there is a winner and a loser.
Success is not measured just on the basis of whether a case is settled as part of the ADR process. It can include clarifying issues and misunderstandings and agreeing facts and issues even if the matter proceeds to litigation making the litigation more efficient with savings in time and cost.
All parties need to appreciate the benefits from the process and have trust in it.
At the Tax ADR launch event, I will run through in detail that process and explain the benefits.
Q3: How does Tax ADR compare to traditional litigation in terms of efficiency, and what insights will you share in your keynote about its evolving role?
Peter: Litigation involves the judge effectively deciding the results like in an arbitration. However, matter is taken out of the hands of the parties and is very much adversarial in tone.
ADR also involves a third-party neutral, the mediator.
However, whilst the mediator controls the process and facilitates and encourages collaborative engagement between the parties to achieve an outcome, that outcome is decided by the parties decide, not the mediator.
At the Tax ADR event I will explain how a good mediator can act as the catalyst for getting the parties to reengage in what might appear an intractable dispute with irreconcilable positions.
Q4: What role should practitioners, businesses, and tax authorities play in shaping the future of Tax ADR, and what will you highlight in your address?
Peter: All the parties should be prepared to put the natural adversarial approach to dispute management to one side and at least for the period of the ADR adopt a collaborative approach with a positive resolution mindset.
Ask yourself the question: what is the difference between being in dispute and just not yet having agreed?
The only real difference is mindset.
At the Tax ADR launch I will explain how this can work in practice and the pivotal role the mediator plays.
Q5: Looking ahead, what is your prediction for the future of ADR in resolving tax disputes, and what key message do you want the audience to take away from your keynote?
Peter: Although the use of ADR in managing tax disputes has been a successful part of HMRC’s litigation and settlement strategy for over 10 years, no process or procedure is perfect.
I would identify two developments which I believe would improve the effectiveness of ADR.
First, to encourage parties to engage in ADR earlier before their positions become entrenched and at a time when their differences of opinion are still issues which they are considering and have a shared interest in resolving.
Chapter 5 of the LSS Commentary sets out detailed guidance as to how the parties can engage in a more collaborative way and this guidance and its use should be more actively promoted in tax dispute management.
Secondly, the Tribunal (the Tax Courts) could more actively encourage parties to use ADR.
That encouragement could take the form of Directions to the parties not just encouraging but directing them to engaging in ADR with a view to settling their dispute or clarifying and agreeing facts and issues in advance of coming to Court.
As regards other countries, although few have any form of ADR process in managing their tax disputes, it is open to any country which permits their Tax Authority and taxpayers to discuss their differences of opinion to introduce an ADR process and learn from the successful UK programme with over 10 years of experience.
Join Us for the TaxADR Launch Event!The conversation doesn’t end here. Join us in London (and online) on Thursday, 27 February 2025 as we dive deeper into the future of tax dispute resolution. Secure your spot today!
Leave a Reply