In simpler times knowing who might be a tax adviser was easy to understand. Predictably, perhaps, the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 stated that a tax adviser was a firm or sole practitioner who provided “advice about the tax affairs of other persons”. This, however, was replaced by a more complex definition through the later Amendment Regulations 2019 with the effect that a tax adviser would now be seen to be anyone who by way of business advice would provide “material aid, or assistance or advice, in connection with the tax affairs of other persons, whether provided directly or through a third party”.
This wider definition caused immediate problems in attempting to state whether firms would or would not therefore count as being tax advisers. On this point the SRA issued guidance to say that a distinction should be made between advising on such issues on the one hand, as opposed to merely providing the client with some relevant information on the other. This in turn would need to be determined on the basis of whether the information that was being provided had been “tailored in any way to the tax-relevant circumstances of the client”. Any information that was limited to the client’s particular circumstances would therefore be more likely to fall within the definition.
By way of an example the SRA suggested that merely sending the client an internet link to an HMRC web page about income tax would be unlikely to meet this threshold since it would be unlikely to contain any tailored advice. Sending out a link to an HMRC website about something very specific, however, and particularly if coupled to some additional commentary or explanation as to its relevance to the client, would be much more likely to be regarded as forming tax advice within the scope of the regulations.
Clearly to the extent that a line was being drawn between the two it was a rather fuzzy line at that, and even then further specific questions remained. A standard conveyancing purchase, for example, will involve calculating for the client the amount of SDLT that will become payable on completion. To date this has been regarded as being outside the scope of being a tax adviser, but this in turn has created confusion in that a firm might validly exclude liability for any tax advice provided in its Terms of Business document but still nonetheless be providing advice on the amount of this tax to be paid.
On this basis the safest course of action for most firms seemed to be to register as tax advisers in any event. This in itself has proved to be more of a challenge than it should have been, however, as the SRA is not able to be an authorised controller of tax advisers as opposed to legal services. Its authority over legal services is to be found at r.12 of the MLR 2017 whereas tax advisers are dealt with at r.11(d). Tax advisers will therefore instead need to be subject to HMRC control.
Furthermore, and to the extent that any further confusion has been required, the HMRC register of tax advisers is not open to the public so if reading this now you will be unable to consult the tax website to see if you are already registered as such. You will therefore need to see if the information is shown on your MySRA page or you will need to put in a request to the SRA Contact Centre at the Cube in Birmingham.
We have to report now that there has been some recent movement on this issue, though not perhaps in a manner that will work for the benefit of firms and their advisers. The clue here is the full title of the HMRC policy paper of the 26th November 2025 ‘Tax advisers to register with HMRC and meet minimum standards’, with the new provisions due to come into effect in May this year. All being well those service standard might be little more than to show the level of ‘care and skill’ that are implicit in section 3 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors in any event. The hope will be that no higher standard of care will come into effect as a result of these impending changes.
What seems fair to conclude, however, is that registration as a tax adviser is likely to be the best way forward for most firms if this is not already the case. This is all the more likely as the wider picture might not be limited to SDLT calculations and the completion of tax returns and could also extend to the conduct of commercial transactions or when dealing with the taxes imposed on trusts. If on this basis the firm does not appear to be so registered then the process is to complete an SRA form FA10B which addresses this point at question 2.11.
In due course we may well then suggest amendments that might need to be made to our template Terms of Business document as currently contained in the Retainer Letter heading of the Precedents and Templates section of the Infohub.
Watch this space.