Author: Glenn

Identity verification is now rolling out for directors, PSCs, and agents, with more filing roles to be included soon under new anti-fraud rules.

Companies House is beginning to roll out mandatory identity verification. This is part of wider reforms introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act that was granted Royal Assent in October 2023. This legislation strengthens Companies House’s authority to prevent the misuse of corporate structures and tackle economic crime.

A key feature of the Act is the requirement for identity checks for individuals involved in company formation, management, or ownership in the UK. Eventually, anyone incorporating a company or being appointed as a director or a person with significant control (PSC) will be legally required to complete identity verification.

Authorised Corporate Service Providers (ACSPs)

Since 18 March 2025, any ACSP that is defined as an individual or organisation conducting Anti-Money Laundering (AML) supervised activities must verify their identity before they can register as an authorised agent with Companies House.

Since 8 April 2025, ACSPs that are registered as authorised agents are permitted to carry out identity verification on behalf of their clients. This means that only those registered as authorised agents will be allowed to submit filings on behalf of other businesses.

Directors and Persons with Significant Control (PSCs)

Also, since 8 April 2025, directors and PSCs are able to verify their identity voluntarily. Over time, this step will move from optional to mandatory, forming a required part of compliance when forming or managing a company.

Individuals Filing with Companies House

At present, identity verification is not compulsory for individuals submitting filings to Companies House. However, this will also change in due course, with verification becoming a statutory obligation in the future.

Use your own vehicle for work? You could be entitled to a tax-free mileage allowance. Make sure you are not missing out on HMRC-approved rates.

If you use your own car, van, motorcycle, or bicycle for business journeys, you may be entitled to a tax-free mileage allowance from your employer. This is known as a Mileage Allowance Payment (MAP) and is designed to cover the costs of using a personal vehicle for work-related travel. Many employees routinely claim this allowance when driving their own vehicle to visit clients, travel between temporary work locations, or attend off-site meetings.

It’s important to understand that MAPs do not apply to ordinary commuting, that is, travelling to and from your regular place of work. However, where travel is genuinely work-related and qualifies as a business journey, the allowance can be a valuable tax-free benefit.

Employers typically reimburse employees using HMRC’s approved mileage rates, which are designed to reflect reasonable running costs. These rates are as follows:

• Cars and vans:
  • 45p per mile for the first 10,000 business miles in a tax year
  • 25p per mile for each mile over 10,000
• Motorcycles: 24p per mile
• Bicycles: 20p per mile

Where an employee carries a colleague as a passenger during a business journey, an additional 5p per mile per passenger can be claimed provided the journey is for business purposes. This extra allowance is also tax-free when paid by the employer.

If an employer pays less than the approved HMRC rates (excluding the passenger allowance), you may be able to claim the shortfall from HMRC utilising Mileage Allowance Relief.

Selling your main residence? Private Residence Relief can exempt you from Capital Gains Tax. If you meet certain conditions, there may be nothing to pay.

In most cases, Capital Gains Tax (CGT) does not apply to the disposal of a property that has been used as your main family residence. This exemption known as Private Residence Relief can eliminate CGT entirely if certain conditions are met. However, the relief does not apply to investment properties that have never been used as your home.

To qualify for full Private Residence Relief, the following conditions must generally be satisfied:

1. The property has been your only or main residence throughout the entire period of ownership.
2. No part of the property has been let out, with the exception of taking in a lodger.
3. No area of the home has been used exclusively for business purposes. (Using a room occasionally or temporarily as a home office does not count as exclusive business use.)
4. The garden and grounds, including any outbuildings, do not exceed 5,000 square metres (just over an acre).
5. The property was not acquired with the sole intention of making a profit.

If a property has been your home at any point, the final 9 months of ownership are automatically treated as a period of qualifying residence for CGT purposes, even if you were not living there when the property was sold. In some limited circumstances, this final exempt period can be extended to 36 months (for example, where the homeowner moves into care or is unable to sell immediately).

Additional reliefs may also be available if the homeowner had to live or work away from home for extended periods.

It's also important to note that married couples and civil partners can only designate one property as their main home at any given time for tax purposes.

The Court of Appeal addressed the complexities of benefit scheme amendments and the lines of responsibility within corporate structures in a complex case surrounding post-employment entitlements. A Mr. Fasano had been an employee of RB Health Ltd., a member of the Reckitt Benckiser (RB) Group of companies, until the 13th of June 2019. The RB Group operates a long-term incentive plan, or LTIP, which makes provision of shares or share options for senior personnel employed by its various companies. 

On the 18th of September 2019, RB Group amended the terms of the 2015 LTIP, requiring those participating in the 2015 LTIP to be employed as of 18 September 2019 to benefit from amended performance conditions in May 2020. Thus, Mr. Fasano was not eligible for an award under the amended LTIP rules. Mr. Fasano brought his case against RB Health and the RB Group to a tribunal, alleging that he had been subjected to indirect discrimination on the grounds of age, contrary to Sections 19 and 39 of the Equality Act 2010. 

However, the tribunal held that RB Group was acting as the agent of RB Health when it amended the terms of the rules of the 2015 LTIP and that the provision, criterion or practice (PCP) thus pursued a legitimate aim. On appeal, it was found that the PCP applied by RB Group was incapable of achieving any legitimate aim of retaining staff and thus was not justified. However, the appeal was ultimately dismissed as the RB Group was not acting as the agent of RB Health, and neither RB Health nor RB Group was liable by reason of Sections 109 and 110 of the Act. 

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and agreed with the appeals tribunal that RB Group was not acting as an agent for RB Health when it amended the performance conditions of the LTIP. Therefore, RB Health is not, therefore, liable for any change made by RB Group to the LTIP pursuant to Section 109 of the Act. The Judge emphasised that, for agency to exist under common law and therefore within the scope of the Act, there needs to be clear authorisation from the principal (RB Health) for the agent (RB Group) to act on its behalf as regards a third party, such as Mr. Fasano. The fact that RB Health's employees benefited from the LTIP didn't automatically make RB Group its agent, although there might have been a different outcome if the rules had been applied by an employer to current employees.  

This case demonstrates that, if a parent company, rather than the direct employer, makes a discriminatory decision regarding benefits, it might be harder to hold the direct employer liable under agency principles. Nonetheless, employers need to ensure that any performance-related policies are justifiable in their aim and implementation and non-discriminatory. 

Gross profit margin
This measures the profitability of your core operations by comparing gross profit (sales minus cost of goods sold) to total revenue. A stable or improving gross margin indicates pricing, production, or service delivery is efficient. A declining margin may signal rising costs or pricing issues.

Formula: (Gross Profit ÷ Revenue) × 100

Cash flow
Positive cash flow ensures a business can meet its obligations, pay suppliers and staff, and invest in growth. Even profitable businesses fail without adequate cash. Tracking cash flow (operating, investing, and financing activities) helps prevent liquidity crises.

Monitor: Monthly net cash inflow/outflow and rolling 3-month cash forecast

Customer acquisition cost (CAC)
This shows how much it costs to acquire a new customer. If CAC is rising without a corresponding increase in customer value or retention, it can drain profitability. Ideally, CAC should be lower than the revenue generated by each customer over their lifetime.

Formula: Total Sales and Marketing Costs ÷ Number of New Customers

Net profit margin
This is the bottom line—what remains after all costs, taxes, and interest. It reflects overall efficiency and financial viability. A strong net margin gives room for reinvestment and debt servicing, and signals long-term sustainability.

Formula: (Net Profit ÷ Revenue) × 100