BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Information Commissioner's Office |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Information Commissioner's Office >> HM Treasury (Decision Notice) [2011] UKICO FER0414857 (19 December 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2011/FER0414857.html Cite as: [2011] UKICO FER0414857, [2011] UKICO FER414857 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Summary: The complainant requested the following: -The ever increasing commercial wind turbine expanse throughout the UK countryside throws up many issue-s and in particular the financial benefit to the economy as a whole. It is my understanding that the UK goes not have a turbine manufacturer and ALL turbines are imported for assembly in the UK. Taking this into account, what are the tax benefits to the UK economy with the importation of turbines? The largest capital outlay for a commercial wind farm is some 75% for the purchasing and erecting of turbines with the remaining 25% for the preparation of the site. a) What is the current tax benefit to the UK economy on the importation of wind turbines?; b) What is the annual tax benefit to the UK economy for wind turbines? The -benefit- does of course mean the direct income from turbines to the treasury in income tax, corporation tax etc; c) What tax benefits are awarded to wind farm operators on an annual basis?; d) What is the tax liability on an annual basis for individual commercial wind turbines? e) Is VAT applicable to wind turbines at any time?- The Information Commissioner-s decision is that HM Treasury dealt with the request under the wrong access regime. He considers that the request is for environmental information and should have been dealt with under the EIR, rather than the FOIA. He also considers that HM Treasury breached regulation 14(2) and 14(3)(a) of the EIR as it did not issue a valid refusal notice within 20 working days citing the exception it was relying on. The Information Commissioner (the Commissioner) contacted HM Treasury and asked it to provide a response to the complainant under the EIR. HM Treasury did so on 1 December 2011. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: EIR 14 - Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 - Complaint Upheld
