Author: Glenn

From 18 November 2025, all company directors and people with significant control (PSCs) will be legally required to verify their identity at Companies House. This verification is being phased in over 12 months and Companies House is contacting companies directly with guidance regarding what needs to be done and by when.

These changes are intended to help ensure that people setting up, running and controlling companies are who they say they are. An estimated 6 to 7 million people will need to verify their identity by November 2026. The verification process will usually be a one-time requirement. Verification can be undertaken directly with Companies House through GOV.UK One Login or via an Authorised Corporate Service Provider (ACSP).

If you are using GOV.UK One Login you will be asked simple questions to find the best way for you to verify your identity. You must provide answers about yourself, not your company. Depending on your answers, you will then be guided to verify:

• with an app 
• by answering security questions online 
• by entering your details from your photo ID on GOV.UK One Login first, then going to a participating Post Office

To verify your identity at Companies House, you can use the GOV.UK online verification service if you have one of several accepted photo identification documents. These include a biometric passport from any country, a full or provisional UK photo driving licence, a UK biometric residence permit or card or a UK Frontier Worker permit.

If you do not have any of the accepted forms of photo ID but live in the UK, there are alternative ways to verify your identity. This includes verifying your identity in-person at a Post Office or using details from your bank or building society account together with your National Insurance number.

If you are unable to verify your identity using any of the available online or in-person methods, you can appoint an ACSP, such as an accountant or solicitor to verify your identity on your behalf. The ACSP must be registered with Companies House and a UK Anti-Money Laundering (AML) supervisory body. You will need to provide approved documents as evidence of your identity and the agent may charge a fee for their services.

If you have sold a UK residential property since 6 April 2020, it is important to be aware that the reporting and payment deadlines for Capital Gains Tax have changed. For property sales completed on or after 27 October 2021, any Capital Gains Tax that becomes payable must now be reported and paid within 60 days of completion. This applies where the property is not fully covered by the private residence exemption. For example, where the property was a rental property, a second home, or only partly used as your main residence. If the property was jointly owned, each owner must report their own share of the gain.

To calculate the gain, you will need information about the dates of purchase and sale, the original purchase price, legal fees and other costs, plus any significant improvement expenses. Estate agency and legal costs on sale will also be needed. The sooner you gather these details, the easier it is to meet the deadline.

For other types of capital gains, for example shares, investments, or commercial property sold by a UK resident, the reporting is usually carried out through your Self Assessment return for the tax year concerned. In some cases it is possible to report gains in real time, rather than waiting until the tax return is due, but this depends on the circumstances. 

If you use the “real time” Capital Gains Tax service, this is available for UK residents disposing of certain assets (not including UK residential property) in the current tax year. If this route is used, the reporting deadline is by 31 December after the end of the tax year of disposal, with payment due by 31 January.

If you think you may have sold or are planning to sell a property or other asset that could give rise to a taxable gain, please contact us as soon as possible. Early information means that we can ensure the calculations are correct and the reporting deadlines are met, which helps avoid unnecessary interest or penalties.

Employees who are working at home may be entitled to claim tax relief on certain work-related expenses. Where such costs are not reimbursed by the employer, either by direct payment or an allowance, employees can submit a claim for tax relief directly to HMRC.

Eligibility to claim tax relief applies when homeworking is a requirement of the role. This may be the case if an employee's job necessitates living at a distance from the office, or if the employer does not maintain a physical office. Tax relief is generally not available where homeworking is a personal choice, even if permitted under the terms of the employment contract or where the office is occasionally at capacity.

Employees may claim a flat-rate tax relief of £6 per week (or £26 per month for monthly-paid staff) to cover additional household costs incurred as a result of working from home, without the need to retain detailed expense records. The value of the relief depends on the individual’s highest marginal rate of tax, for example, a basic-rate taxpayer (20%) would receive £1.20 per week in tax relief (20% of £6). Alternatively, individuals may opt to claim the actual additional costs incurred, provided they can supply evidence to HMRC in support of the claim.

Backdated claims for up to four previous tax years are permitted.

Tax relief may also be available for the use of a personal vehicle be it a car, van, motorcycle or bicycle when used for business purposes. Relief is not available for ordinary commuting between home and a regular place of work. However, where travel is to a temporary workplace, or where the vehicle is used for other qualifying business journeys, tax relief may apply.

In addition, employees may claim tax relief on the cost of equipment purchased personally for work-related purposes, such as a laptop, office chair, or mobile phone, provided these are used exclusively or primarily for business use.

Ms Constantine had been a veterinary surgeon since 2017. Initially, she had worked every day with two half days rest, but this increased to four full days and a weekend every three weeks. Moreover, she was required to seek permission to be absent on those days she was not required to attend work. In November 2020, Ms Constantine began a sickness absence, claiming burnout, and was certified as being unfit to work from 1 December 2020 to 4 January 2021 due to anxiety. In May 2021, a ‘fit for work’ statement recommended one day a week, which was subsequently increased in June 2021 to one and a half days a week, with at least one day off between workdays. 

Following a meeting on 22 June 2022, the respondent agreed to look into issuing a new contract for a three-and-a-half-day week with two in six weekends. A proposed contract with a covering letter dated 24 August 2022 was sent to the claimant with a £23,267 gross salary per annum, which was not in alignment with the agreed basis that it should be based, pro rata, on her previous full-time salary of £44,000 p.a. The claimant contended that the revised salary calculations were severely flawed and effectively constituted a 22.4% pay cut based on a new notional denominator of 260 working days in the form of a ‘take it or leave it’ offer. 

Further, a series of unauthorised wage deductions had been made from May 2021 to 31 July 2023, and Ms Constantine ultimately resigned in 2023, lodging a formal grievance on 14 March 2023, specifically complaining about the basis of the calculations of her pro-rata pay from May 2021, asserting a breach of the Part-Time Worker (PTW) Regulations 2000 and unlawful deduction from wages.

The Tribunal ruled in favour of Ms Constantine, finding an unlawful deduction from wages, constructive unfair dismissal, and unfavourable treatment arising in consequence of disability, and she was awarded a total of £19,017.  Ms Constantine was deemed to have been a disabled person from December 2021 due to chronic fatigue, as the respondent should have known, and the act of proposing a new part-time contract in August 2022 at a disproportionately low salary constituted unfavourable treatment arising from the claimant’s need to reduce her hours due to disability (s.15 Equality Act 2010).

The claim for constructive unfair dismissal was upheld because the respondent had committed a fundamental breach of contract by withholding admitted back pay and making its payment conditional on the claimant agreeing to the proposed future salary. Finally, the Tribunal found that an unauthorised deduction from wages had occurred, applying the Apportionment Act 1870 to set the lawful deduction rate at 1/365th of the annual salary for days the claimant was rostered to work but was absent.

When seeking to reduce an employee's hours, any resulting contract must be calculated correctly on a pro-rata basis in accordance with the PTWs. Employers must prove that any proposed pay revisions are not only fair, but also "necessary and appropriate" to achieve a legitimate business aim. Above all, employers must never deliberately withhold payment in an effort to coerce an employee into agreeing to new contractual terms. Such an act risks breaching the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, creating grounds for constructive unfair dismissal.

The UK continues to struggle with low productivity growth, a long-running challenge that shows little sign of improvement. In the three months to June 2025, output per hour worked was around 1.5% above its pre-pandemic level, but it actually fell by almost 1% compared with the same period a year earlier. The previous quarter had seen only a marginal rise and overall, the trend is one of stagnation rather than sustained growth.

Although the figures appear slightly better than before the pandemic, they underline a deeper problem. Productivity growth has been flat for much of the past fifteen years, averaging only around 0.5% per year since the financial crisis, compared with about 2% annually in the decades before 2008. This persistent weakness limits the economy’s ability to generate higher living standards, boost wages and support stronger public finances.

What lies behind the figures

Several factors contribute to the poor results. A shift in activity towards lower-productivity industries has diluted national performance, as sectors such as retail, hospitality and parts of the public sector expanded while more productive sectors grew more slowly. The public sector itself has seen a notable rise in hours worked, particularly in health and social care, without a matching increase in measured output.

Regional disparities also continue to weigh on national averages. London and the South East maintain far higher productivity levels than many other parts of the country, particularly regions with weaker transport links and lower investment. Capital investment remains subdued overall, and many businesses have been slow to adopt new technology or digital systems that could raise efficiency.

The bigger picture

For all the political focus on growth, the UK remains trapped in what economists often call a productivity puzzle. The country is producing more than before the pandemic, but only slightly and progress is fragile. Without stronger investment, skills development and incentives to innovate, productivity gains are likely to remain modest, constraining both wage growth and the government’s ability to fund improvements in public services.