Research and analysis

HMRC Stakeholder Engagement Research 2022

Published 18 July 2022

Research conducted by Yonder Consulting among HMRC stakeholders in 2022. Prepared by Yonder Consulting (Owen Thomas, Amelia Evans, Cecilia Sandell, Callum Gray, and Kaitlyn Mailer) for HMRC Communications

Disclaimer: The views in this report are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect those of HM Revenue & Customs.

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has commissioned stakeholder research each year since 2012, with the exclusion of 2019 to 2020. The research provides insights into the views of main stakeholder groups, identifies trends and changes in attitudes, and informs improvements to the way HMRC engages with these audiences in order to better fulfil its strategic objectives.

1.2 Research Aims

Yonder was commissioned by HMRC to undertake research among its stakeholders to:

• understand stakeholders’ general perceptions of HMRC: favourability, trust, and change over time
• gauge awareness of HMRC and stakeholders’ knowledge about HMRC’s remit, vision and priorities
• explore HMRC’s perceived performance generally as the UK’s tax authority and in specific areas
• assess HMRC’s communication and engagement with stakeholders

1.3 Method

Yonder conducted two phases of research on behalf of HMRC, consisting of an initial quantitative phase, followed by a qualitative phase.

1.3.1 Sample

The sample of Parliamentarians and devolved administrations was drawn from a complete list of current Members of Parliament, Members of the Scottish Parliament, Members of the Senedd, and Members of the Legislative Assembly in Northern Ireland. The remaining sample of Business, Customs, Voluntary and Community Sector, Agents, Media and Other stakeholders was drawn from a list of important stakeholders identified by HMRC.

Quantitative research

Yonder interviewed 272 HMRC stakeholders using an online survey. The quantitative survey was completed by a similar number of stakeholders as in last year’s research, though the survey was shorter in length than previously.

Qualitative research

Yonder conducted 37 qualitative in-depth interviews by telephone, lasting between 20 and 40 minutes. The interviews were conducted with the use of a discussion guide that was agreed upon by HMRC.

Stakeholder group/ Sample size	Quantitative	Qualitative
Parliamentarians and devolved administrations	44 (27 MPs, 9 MSs, 5 MLAs, and 3 MSPs)	7
Business	62	8
Customs	19	3
Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS)	23	6
Agents	95	8
Media	4	1
Other	25	4
Total sample size	272	37

Please note that a small number of research participants appeared in more than one stakeholder group, however, no stakeholder is counted twice in the total figure.

Some stakeholders did participate in both the quantitative survey, and a qualitative interview.

The qualitative research is intended to explore and understand this group’s range of perceptions and attitudes towards HMRC; it is not intended to give any indication of the prevalence of these beliefs across the population as a whole.

Please note that changes in sample size, sample composition and question wording mean that caution should be taken when comparing results between research waves.

1.3.2 Fieldwork

Quantitative fieldwork ran from 13 January 2022 and 11 March 2022.

Qualitative interviews took place between 16 February 2022 and 4 April 2022.

2. Findings

2.1 Overall perceptions

HMRC’s stakeholders believed that the department performed well against its main performance indicators. Favourability towards HMRC remained very strong, as did trust in the department. Most stakeholders identified themselves as critical friends or advocates of HMRC rather than critics. Nevertheless – after research in 2021 found that many measures had reached their highest points since research began in 2012 – some HMRC reputation indicators have declined in the last year.

Stakeholders continued to be very familiar with HMRC’s work. Stakeholders’ knowledge and understanding were often built upon long lasting relationships, with many having had contact with the department for many years. Knowledge of HMRC’s work was generally centred on stakeholders’ specific sector or area of focus, which did mean knowledge outside of their specific interest was often less detailed.

Understanding of HMRC’s broader vision and priorities was weaker than that of the work it does – but stakeholders rarely identified this as a problem, given their intimate knowledge of their own area of focus.

Favourability towards HMRC remained high, with all stakeholder groups more favourable than unfavourable towards the department. Overall favourability, however, fell slightly this year, reverting to levels seen in 2017.

The variable that influenced stakeholder favourability towards HMRC the most was their perception of the department’s ‘performance as the UK tax authority’. The extent to which ‘HMRC understands stakeholders’ views’, and its efforts in ‘improving customer service’ also influenced favourability, but to a lesser extent.

Most stakeholders agreed that HMRC was an organisation they could trust. Perceptions that HMRC could be relied upon to ‘carry out its duties professionally’ and to ‘look after customers’ interests’ were particularly influential in building trust in the department.

The majority of stakeholders identified themselves as ‘critical friends’ of HMRC .Very few identified as ‘critics’. For most stakeholders, being a ‘critical friend’ meant supporting HMRC when appropriate and providing constructive feedback when necessary.

More stakeholders would speak positively than negatively about HMRC’s staff, its communications and engagement, its performance, as well as its objectives and leadership team. Indeed, most stakeholders rated the quality of HMRC’s leadership and management as either ‘very good’ or ‘fairly good’. HMRC’s customer service was the only aspect of the department stakeholders would be more likely to speak negatively about than positively.

2.2 HMRC’s performance

Stakeholders generally considered HMRC to be performing well as the UK’s tax authority. However, there had been a fall in perceptions of HMRC’s performance in the last year.

Stakeholders believed HMRC was broadly performing well within what they perceived to be a challenging context, with perceptions of limited resources being mentioned as a particular challenge.

HMRC was perceived by stakeholders to have handled the COVID-19 pandemic well, with many recognising what they regarded as a significant expansion of HMRC’s role during this time. That said, the sympathy and goodwill the department received as a result of the pandemic seemed to have waned slightly in the last year. There was a perception that HMRC had been slow to readjust to the post-pandemic demands and working patterns of stakeholders and customers, who wanted a service that reached or exceeded the standards set pre-pandemic. Compared with the previous year, stakeholders were less willing to accept the pandemic as a justification for customer service that was regarded as not having returned to pre-pandemic service levels.

Consistent with previous years’ research, ‘poor customer service’ and ‘poor responsiveness’ were the most common reasons for perceptions of poor performance. Stakeholders believed the biggest issues with HMRC’s customer service were delays in answering public phonelines, and the slow speeds at which cases were processed.

Added to this, there were increased concerns that HMRC sometimes appeared to lack the ‘technical skill’ and ‘flexibility’ that some stakeholders called for. This was evidenced by some stakeholders receiving inconsistent answers to questions, and a lack of clarity or explanation around decision-making in specific cases.

2.3 HMRC’s remit

The majority of stakeholders agreed that HMRC’s primary remit is ‘collecting taxes’. Whilst there was an awareness amongst stakeholders of other elements of HMRC’s remit such as ‘enforcing legislation’ and ‘interpreting policy’, ‘collecting taxes’ was overwhelmingly considered the department’s primary purpose. Stakeholders perceived HMRC to be doing this competently, with most thinking its performance at ‘collecting the right tax for the UK’ was good.

HMRC’s performance with regards to ‘making it hard to bend or break the rules’ and ‘making it easy for people and businesses to get their tax right’ was regarded as less strong. On both measures, less than half thought HMRC’s performance was good, though stakeholders were more likely to regard its performance as good than bad.

2.4 Engagement

Stakeholders continued to be largely satisfied with their working relationship with HMRC, which was one of the most important variables that influenced favourability towards the department.

Stakeholders remained overwhelmingly satisfied with the ‘courtesy and professionalism’ of staff at HMRC. Most continued to be satisfied with the ‘technical expertise of staff’, as well as ‘how well staff are able to explain HMRC’s point of view’, though both measures fell slightly this year.

There was a continued strong perception that HMRC listened, understood, and responded to stakeholder views – although performance on the latter two metrics also fell slightly in the last year.

Areas of HMRC’s engagement that stakeholders were less satisfied with were ‘how promptly staff deal with issues / queries’, and ‘the number of different staff members or departments you have to speak to in order to deal with issues / queries’.

Stakeholders with designated points of contact within areas of HMRC in which they were particularly interested were more likely than those without such contacts to be satisfied with their working relationship. Those without named contacts sometimes thought the quality of their engagement with HMRC could improve, and this was often linked to the length of time that passed and the number of staff members that needed to be spoken to before responses were received.

Stakeholders praised the frequency and number of channels of communication. The most commonly used methods of engagement were emails with staff and the GOV.UK website. Almost all methods of communication used by HMRC were thought to be useful, but those that had attended face-to-face/virtual meetings or round-tables or had engaged with senior leadership were particularly likely to believe it had been useful.