I copied the following from an accountants' forum about the Dyson affair. Johnson insists that he wanted to save lives but he didn't look at manufacturers in the UK. As with PPE and other matters, he didn't approach the experts but just his cronies.
Apologies for the length but it is an easy read.
"According to texts revealed by the BBC on Wednesday, vacuum cleaner manufacturer Sir James Dyson contacted Prime Minister Boris Johnson directly to ask for tax breaks for his staff in March 2020.
The request sought exemptions from PAYE and other taxes for Dyson employees who might fail the statutory residence test while obliged to work in the UK as part of his company’s effort to support the government’s ventilation procurement programme. A key message in the exchange reads:
Rishi has fixed the Country Day Count issue but not Work Days. The former is now covered under an 'Exceptional Circumstances' umbrella, Work Days are not. So, he has freed up your ability to be in the UK but not to work there - even in support of this National emergency
Johnson did not deny the content of the texts during a fiery episode of Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) later in the day and responded: “I make no apology at all to shift heaven and earth as any prime minister would do in the circumstances to source ventilators.”
He believed – wrongly it transpires - that our hospitals needed more ventilators than usual channels could supply. As a result, he was willing to bend over backwards when Dyson offered assistance.
Yet even his supporters might squirm at the tone of the texts, which include a line that sounds like an outtake from bad sci-fi movie: “I am First Lord of the Treasury and you can take it that we are backing you to do what you need.”
The NHS ultimately rejected the ventilator designs proposed by the Dyson empire, which is now primarily located in Singapore, and the provisional plan was abandoned within a few weeks.
While the manufacturer reputedly lost money because the deal was shelved, if it had it been completed the group would probably have made profits that would be taxed at Singapore rates rather than those in the UK.
Sir James clarified that he was “seeking compliance with rules”. In fact, he was seeking a change to the law, which duly arrived the following month as a Covid emergency measure, effectively bypassing Parliament and applying to anyone working in relevant projects.
Labour leader Sir Kier Starmer lost no time in characterising Sir James Dyson as an expat “billionaire Conservative supporter” who had hotlines to both the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister and was given assurances that neither his company nor his staff would face any adverse UK tax consequences as a result of entering into this arrangement.
If nothing else, that means Dyson enjoyed a big competitive advantage over UK-based manufacturers.
The furore may partly stem from recent history. There have been numerous controversies involving deals between HMRC bigwigs and multinational companies that reduced unpaid tax, interest and penalties to palatable sums.
In each of these high-profile cases, had the parties which entered into the settlements paid tax on the correct basis, the amounts received by the Exchequer would have been considerably greater.
At a time when the government is already being accused of “sleaze and cronyism”, the last thing it needs are suggestions that Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson have both offered to change tax law for the benefit of a friendly tax exile."
