Modernising Revenue Scotland's tax administration framework – communications from Revenue Scotland to taxpayers: Consultation

Proposed Changes to the Use of Electronic Communications

Overview

This section of the consultation provides an outline of the proposed introduction of a “digital by default” approach to Revenue Scotland communications with taxpayers, sets out what could be in scope of this and offers commentary on the opportunities and benefits of change and the associated issues that would need to be considered.

Proposal

In an increasingly digital world, the Scottish Government seeks to ensure that Revenue Scotland can adapt and take advantage of new and emerging technologies to continue to provide a highly efficient tax system.

Views are therefore sought on the case for introducing a position that, where a taxpayer has provided an appropriate means of electronic communication, Revenue Scotland would by default (i.e. instead of requiring an opt-in) be able to issue notices, penalties, debt letters, decisions and other formal taxpayer correspondence on them by means of electronic communications. This would include formal service of documents.

The form of electronic communications could, for example, cover Revenue Scotland communicating with the taxpayer through a range of routes, including:

• by email (where an email address has been provided);
• by uploading a document to an electronic storage system, from which the taxpayer can download the document, with a notifying email being sent to the email address provided by the taxpayer; or
• through secure means of transmission on Revenue Scotland systems (such as SETS).

It may also cover other forms of electronic communications such as social media or text messaging services, where a taxpayer has provided relevant contact details.

The intent would be to provide sufficient flexibility to allow Revenue Scotland to use new and emerging forms of electronic communications over time, as appropriate. This would mean that the legislative framework would not need to change to account for new technologies. An opt-out rather than opt-in approach is proposed in line with Revenue Scotland’s ambition to be digital by default and to maximise operational efficiencies in accordance with Scotland’s public service reform agenda.

The Scottish Government and Revenue Scotland recognise, however, that the introduction of the use of electronic communications by default would require the introduction of certain presumptions around receipt. It would also be essential to ensure that taxpayers can easily opt out of any arrangements. These points are considered later in this consultation.

Opportunities and Benefits of the default use of electronic communications

Requiring express consent to electronic communications causes delay, and administrative and resource challenges. There also remain uncertainties around how such consent can be evidenced.

Establishing electronic communications as Revenue Scotland’s default method of taxpayer communication could offer several benefits for both Revenue Scotland and for taxpayers.

For Revenue Scotland, measures which facilitate the reduced use of postal communications and increased use of digital channels would enable it to communicate more quickly with taxpayers, and reduce both costs and the environmental impacts associated with printing and transportation.

This proposal should also help to meet Revenue Scotland’s strategic goal to align with Scotland’s wider ambitions for Public Service Reform, in particular by fostering a more reliable, responsive and person-centred system.

As set out in the illustrative case studies below, the default use of electronic communications also offers several potential benefits for taxpayers, including for example by:

• allowing correspondence to be quickly shared with tax advisers or a family member for assistance, which may reduce the risk of delay or error in responding to Revenue Scotland;
• providing accessibility benefits by allowing taxpayers to use digital tools to e.g. increase the size of the text or use a text to speech function to improve accessibility;
• enabling taxpayers to access communications from any location where they have internet access, so they can proceed in a more timely and efficient way in their dealings with Revenue Scotland than might otherwise be possible;
• supporting taxpayers whose primary language is not English by enabling them to make better use of linguistic tools and options to immediately and accurately translate tax communications and allow them to proceed with confidence in their dealings with Revenue Scotland; and
• helping taxpayers to manage their tax compliance responsibilities in a more efficient manner, saving them time and potentially money.

Case Study: Elderly Taxpayer – Security and Support

Challenge:

Margaret finds it difficult to understand some of the printed correspondence received from Revenue Scotland without assistance.

Digital Benefit:

• Margaret can share access to the correspondence with her agent or family member for support.
• Accessibility features (e.g. text-to-speech, larger fonts) help her understand messages better.

Outcome:

Margaret feels safer and more supported in managing her tax affairs, with fewer risks of missed deadlines or misunderstandings.

Case Study: Non-English Speaker – Language Support and Clarity

Challenge:

Ahmed’s first language is Arabic and he has limited proficiency in English. He receives tax correspondence by post in English, which he struggles to understand. He often relies on friends or community support to interpret letters, which delays his responses and causes anxiety around compliance.

Digital Benefit:

• Digital platforms often offer multilingual support or integration with translation tools.
• Ahmed can use browser-based translation features to read correspondence in Arabic.
• He can access guidance using the Revenue Scotland ReciteMe tool in his preferred language.
• Digital records are easier to share with trusted advisors or interpreters.

Outcome:

Ahmed feels more confident managing his tax obligations, responds faster to queries, and avoids misunderstandings or missed deadlines due to language barriers.

Case Study: Remote Worker – Accessibility and Convenience

Challenge:

James frequently travels and works from different locations. He finds it difficult to keep track of physical mail, especially when he is away from home for extended periods.

Digital Benefit:

• Digital access allows James to view tax correspondence from anywhere.
• He can respond to queries or view documents online without needing to return home.
• Secure cloud storage helps him organise and archive his tax records.

Outcome:

James stays informed and responsive to tax authority communications, reducing stress and improving his financial management.

Case Study: Remote Worker – Time Sensitive Tax Updates

Challenge:

Sarah often receives important tax correspondence and filing reminders by post, which can be delayed or missed due to her busy schedule and reliance on staff to manage mail. She once missed a tax return filing deadline resulting in a penalty.

Digital Benefit:

By switching to digital communications:

• Sarah receives instant email or app notifications for deadlines and updates.
• She can access correspondence securely from her phone or laptop.

Outcome:

Sarah avoid penalties, improves her tax compliance, and saves time managing paper correspondence.

Questions

2. Do you agree with the proposal for Revenue Scotland to move to electronic communications by default, where a taxpayer has provided a means of electronic communication (except where they have opted out or are otherwise digitally excluded)? Please provide an explanation for your answer.

3. Are there alternative approaches which Revenue Scotland could take to facilitate greater use of electronic communications with taxpayers?

4. Do you agree that the definition of electronic communications should provide Revenue Scotland with the flexibility to communicate electronically through a range of measures? Please provide an explanation for your answer.

5. Are there any specific circumstances, excluding consideration of opt-out arrangements, where you consider that the use of electronic communications would not be appropriate?

Specific Considerations

Establishing an Opt-Out

Revenue Scotland data shows a high level of digital engagement by taxpayers and their agents, such that a digital by default approach would seem to be both feasible and widely accepted.

However, not all taxpayers can receive or would want to receive electronic communications. For example, although the most recent Scottish Household Survey indicates that 91% of Scottish households overall have internet access, this drops down to 83% for those aged 60 and over with no reported disabilities and to 69% for those aged 60 and over with disabilities.^[12]

It is proposed that for those taxpayers who wish to opt-out of receiving electronic communications or are otherwise digitally excluded, Revenue Scotland would serve documents on them by ordinary post. There is no universally accepted definition of “digital exclusion.” Typically, “digital exclusion" refers to sections of the population not being able to use the internet in ways that are needed to participate fully in modern society.^[13] Revenue Scotland intends that a taxpayer or their agent would self-assess whether or not they were digitally excluded; and that may be on a temporary or permanent basis.

Where the taxpayer’s circumstances change and they wish to engage with Revenue Scotland by electronic means or alternatively, if they no longer wish to engage by electronic means or they become digitally excluded, the taxpayer would have to contact Revenue Scotland to opt in or out of receiving electronic communications as appropriate.

The Scottish Government would welcome views on how, if a digital by default approach was introduced, an opt out process could be put in place.

Questions

6. What process do you think Revenue Scotland should put in place to enable taxpayers to opt out of receiving electronic communications?

7. What measures should be put in place to ensure that taxpayers are aware of the opt out?

Establishing proof of transmission and presumptions related to receipt

The Scottish Government propose that the Regulations provide that:

• a document certified by a member of Revenue Scotland’s staff to be an accurate copy of any information delivered by means of electronic communications shall be evidence, unless the contrary is proved, that information was delivered by means of electronic communications on that occasion; and
• the document constitutes the entirety of what was delivered on that occasion.

To make the process of Revenue Scotland sending electronic communications to taxpayers clear and reliable, the Scottish Government recognises that there would be a need to introduce specific rebuttable presumptions related to the receipt of electronic communications concerning the devolved taxes.

Such presumptions would, for the purposes of communications from Revenue Scotland to taxpayers, replace those currently in place in ILRA.

The Scottish Government proposes that Revenue Scotland could operate on the presumption that a notice transmitted by electronic communications is received on the day of transmission, unless the contrary is shown. Although this would be shorter than the 48-hour period provided for in ILRA, it would be consistent with, for example, section 101 of the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 and section 14 of the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Act 2024.^[14]

Furthermore, such rebuttable presumptions could include that:

• the identity of the sender or recipient of any information delivered via electronic communications shall be the person recorded as such on that electronic communication;
• any information delivered by electronic communication on behalf of Revenue Scotland shall be deemed to have been delivered by them to the recipient, unless the recipient can prove it was delivered without their knowledge or connivance; and
• any information falling to be delivered or payment falling to be made by Revenue Scotland has been made if the making of that payment or information has been recorded on Revenue Scotland’s computer system and the time of receipt shall be deemed to be that recorded on that computer system.

The presumptions set out above would align with those already operated by HMRC in relation to reserved taxes. For example, HMRC uses the Income and Corporation Taxes (Electronic Communications) Regulations 2003^[15], which include clear rules about how digital messages are sent, received, and proven.

These rules would not, however, apply, where some other form of delivery is required (e.g. by a court or tribunal).

Questions

8. Do you agree with the proposal that a copy of an electronic communication will be proof that information was delivered by electronic communications, unless there is evidence to the contrary? Please provide an explanation for your answer

9. Do you agree with the proposal that a notice transmitted by electronic communications is received on the day of transmission, unless there is evidence to the contrary? Please provide an explanation for your answer

10. If in agreement with the proposal, do you agree that it would be appropriate to align with the presumptions already in operation for HMRC.

Risk of error and uncertainty

The Scottish Government recognises that there are various risks that would need to be considered and addressed in relation to a digital by default approach.

Electronic communications may, for example, be issued to an incorrect or out of date email address, which could lead to the taxpayer not receiving the communication and inadvertent disclosure of protected taxpayer information.

Another risk is that electronic communications may not be received by the taxpayer, either because they did not open the communication, it was not dispatched by Revenue Scotland’s servers or there is a service interruption. Alternatively, a taxpayer may experience difficult life events meaning that they cannot interact with, or appreciate the significance of, the electronic communication that they receive at that point.

Additionally, where the taxpayer has engaged a representative, there may be confusion as to who was responsible for dealing with any communication; or there may be confusion about the distinction between a formal notice and further correspondence which re-attaches that formal notice. A taxpayer may not also treat correspondence from Revenue Scotland as genuine.

Although these risks apply, in a different context, to the current use of postal communications, the Scottish Government recognises that they will need to be considered fully in relation to any change. This could include consideration of the extent to which, for example, Revenue Scotland could make use of technologies which alert it if an electronic communication is not opened within a specified period after the communication has been transmitted.

Question

11. What action could Revenue Scotland take to address the risks of error and uncertainty highlighted above?

Support

Revenue Scotland regularly carries out sample checks of its communications with taxpayers to ensure quality assurance is maintained. This audit process will likewise encompass electronic communications issued by Revenue Scotland.

Furthermore, if a digital by default approach is introduced, Revenue Scotland plans to maintain its support desk, opinion service and enhanced support service to ensure that taxpayers would continue to be able to contact and speak with Revenue Scotland staff.

Question

12. Do you consider that the audit process and support that Revenue Scotland has in place are effective in supporting taxpayers in their interactions with Revenue Scotland? Please provide an explanation for your answer.

Proposed changes to the Use of Ordinary Post

Overview

This section of the consultation outlines the proposed changes to Revenue Scotland’s use of ordinary post as a method of communication with taxpayers. This includes the potential introduction of various “presumptions of receipt” for ordinary post communications sent to taxpayers.

Proposal

As set out above, there is some uncertainty around whether a taxpayer can be said to have received correspondence sent by ordinary post and the time of receipt.

The Scottish Government seeks views on the case to provide certainty to allow Revenue Scotland to make use of ordinary post where:

• a taxpayer has not provided a means of electronic communication;
• a taxpayer has provided a means of electronic communication, but has opted out of receiving such communications; or
• postal delivery is otherwise required by court or tribunal rules or similar.

The use of ordinary post is consistent with the current practice of HMRC and other authorities acting under Acts of the UK Parliament, who because of a different statutory framework, can issue documents by ordinary post with rebuttable presumptions of receipt.^[16]

In certain circumstances, Revenue Scotland would still intend to use recorded delivery/signed for post, including for example correspondence for high value cases or where court rules require this.

Presumptions

Revenue Scotland’s current scope to use ordinary post is limited by legal and evidential considerations. This is particularly due to the lack of a presumption of receipt of the sent communication, which could potentially undermine the validity of formal notices served by Revenue Scotland on taxpayers.

The Scottish Government recognises the need for clear rules about when letters, particularly formal notices, can be considered to have been received by the intended recipient. This would help to resolve uncertainty around whether a taxpayer can be said to have received correspondence sent by ordinary post, and the time of receipt, and promote fairness for all.

In the case of documents served by ordinary post on an address in the United Kingdom^[17], the proposed approach would be to provide that a letter from Revenue Scotland is presumed to have been received by the taxpayer:

• where First Class post is used, on the second business day after the date of posting unless the contrary is shown; or
• where Second Class post is used, on the fourth business day after the date of posting unless the contrary is shown.

These timescales align with Ofcom’s recent delivery standards for Second Class deliveries.^[18]

If the proposed arrangements were introduced, the expectation is that Revenue Scotland would primarily send correspondence via second class post. First class post would generally only be used for more time sensitive correspondence.

Importantly though, a presumption is only that – it is capable of being overturned or “rebutted” where there is evidence, such as a returned letter, an incorrect address being used or local delivery disruption to that particular address.

Opportunities and benefits

Introducing a presumption of receipt of service by ordinary post would align more clearly with the legal presumptions that apply for service by recorded or registered post. It would also:

• help to resolve uncertainty around whether a taxpayer can be said to have received correspondence sent by ordinary post and the time of receipt;
• result in cost savings for Revenue Scotland as the use of ordinary post is cheaper and more efficient; and
• make it easier for the taxpayer to receive such communications (as opposed to service by recorded delivery/Signed For post) as the taxpayer will not have to be physically present at the address to receive service or make arrangements to collect the mail.

Risks and challenges

As is the case for electronic communications, there are various risks and other issues which would need to be properly considered. For example:

• postal communications may be issued to an incorrect postal address, which could lead to a taxpayer not receiving the communication and an accidental disclosure of protected taxpayer information; or
• delivery of postal communications may be delayed for several reasons including strikes, severe weather and system delays.

Questions

13. Do you agree that service by ordinary post is a proportionate alternative means of communication to those taxpayers who do not have a digital means of communication or who otherwise opt out of electronic communications? Please provide an explanation for your answer.

14. Do you agree with the opportunities, benefits, challenges and risks associated with the use of ordinary post as set out above? Please provide an explanation for your answer.

15. Where correspondence is served by ordinary post, do you agree with the proposal that second class post would primarily be used? Please provide an explanation for your answer.

16. Do you agree with the proposed rebuttable presumptions of delivery for service by first and second class ordinary post within the UK? Please provide an explanation for your answer.

17. If presumptions were introduced, on what grounds do you think these should be rebuttable by the intended recipient?

18. Relatedly, what steps could be taken to address the risks set out above? Are there other risks or issues which should be considered and addressed?

19. How much notice would taxpayers and agents need for these changes, and how could Revenue Scotland best communicate it?