NO2ID

It started out with good intentions, but it feels a bit 'rambly'.
The legal stuff would need to be checked, and there may be one or two unverified assumptions...
Am I on the right track here? Does it need a bullet-point executive summary?
===========================

Identity Cards - Good or Bad For Business?

Many businesses will be directly affected by the national identity system. This will especially be the case for the retail sector who will be the front line in implementing the scheme in relation to members of the public.
You should be aware that Section 16 of the Identity Cards Act prohibits anyone who is not in the public sector from requesting a person's Identity Card unless other forms of identification are also permitted. This will mean that an Identity Card will merely be an additional method, rather than a required or necessarily superior replacement.

The regulations concerning reasonable requests for proof of age are unaffected by the existence of Identity Cards, although the imposition of a requirement to present proof of age for all sales of all age-limited goods has not been ruled out.

The behaviour of under-agers will of course be unaffected by any of this.

For an Identity Card to be any more effective in preventing under-age sales than a standard photo-card, you will require a special terminal to verify that the card itself is genuine. This will mean either the purchase or lease of a terminal, together with the associated maintenance costs and the cost of an operator's licence.

Any staff who use the terminal will need to be trained and authorised, and in possession of their own Identity Card.

Counter-space will be required for the terminal, and customers will be unimpressed by delays caused by anything beyond the most cursory check.

Use of an official Identity Terminal will not provide a shift in legal liability away from its current basis - a shop and its staff will still be liable on the grounds of improper use as the terminal will be considered to be the final authority on the matter.

Summarised:

Cost of Identity Terminals
- lease/purchase
- equipment licence
- maintenance
- operator training licences
Alternative proofs of age must be permitted
No assurance of protection from legal liability

Updated above: section 16 prohibition added 'anyone who is not in the public sector' which is probably general enough?

Added 'summarised' at the end to show what the bullet-point bit would be.

A reservedly frilly version is on its way...

Hi Dr Wibble, I think it needs to be bullet pointed in terms of the negatives for small traders. It is a bit rambly at the moment, I agree with you.

OK.
New version posted on some borrowed space - slightly frillied, bullet points at the top, explanations later, hopefully I haven't gone overboard with the italics. It's intentionally 'bare' for the moment, and the line breaks aren't quite as random as might first appear.

I'm still not entirely sure if this is heading towards a letter, leaflet or flyer, or some kind of bizarre combination.

Clicky Here

You're doing great work!

Could I direct you to elements which particularly impact on small businesses?

Everyone who has ever been in small business knows that not everything is declared, ie there's a lot of work 'on the black'. This also happens in retail,but to a much more limited extent.

Anything which makes a sole trader etc aware that the government may have access, or will potentially gain access, to a bucket load of financial information about him/her will make him/her very nervous and hostile to the proposition. Governments know that small traders 'avoid' tax as much as possible, and this is one reason that small traders pay an extra tax via NI, while not being able to claim any of the benefits. It used to be at 11%, I think, I'm not sure what it is at now. Everyone knows why this is paid.

Perhaps 2 texts would be useful, one for retail and one for all other sectors.

I think you have a point there! I'll need to ponder this one - aiming at sole traders on the basis of fiddling the books might not be the best approach, but is one to keep at the back of one's mind.

I think the possibility of account micromanagement by the tax office would be extremely unappealing though. There's definitely a VAT angle in there somewhere, as well.

*Wibble wibble, we want Dr. Wibble!*
*Wibble wibble, we want Dr. Wibble!*
*Wibble wibble, we want Dr. Wibble!*

Seriously, how is the writing coming along? I'm firing up my email prog ready to send out the business email as soon as it's ready....no pressure, then..

Patience, grasshopper!
With any luck the brain will be sufficiently functional for an update later today.

OK, so 'somewhat later' than expected - I'm particularly unfamiliar with how small businesses work, so ideas are short. Also trying not to avoid implications of dodgy-dealing!

Ideas so far:

Small and Independent Businesses : Why ID Cards Won't Help

New employees : are they permitted to work? They give you an ID card, and you
can call the IPS helpline, who, for a fee, will verify that the card is genuine.
Without a special terminal, it will still be up to you to decide whether the
person in the photo is the person who handed you the card.

There is likely to be an automatic linking to VAT records. Whilst there may seem
to be a benefit to this, you will not be permitted to use these records for your
accounts. You will, however, be liable for any discrepancies between your
accounts and the official records.

Contracts, depending on scale, are likely to require the ID card numbers of the
people responsible. If you supply goods or services to a customer who later
turns out to be a government-defined 'undesirable', or is linked to such a
person, your ID number will automatically show up as a candidate for
investigation. This link will remain on your record, regardless of its
relevance.

I like what you have so far. The VAT thing, I don't understand the potential linking - but VAT is a massively sore point with small businesses, so it's a really good one to talk about.

Small business/sole trader mentality:

All of them do some work on the black, or sticky deals, depending on size. They all hate the VAT man with a passion and really resent in effect being a government tax collector. They dread doing the VAT. They are uneasy about the myriad regulations which the government bring in at every step, which makes their life harder and harder. Most of them earn good money but not wonderful money. They are all quite independent people with a strong dose of common sense (the ones still in business that is, dreamers don't last). They tend by nature to be non conformist in 'societal terms'. There's a lot of risk and effort involved in setting up business for oneself.


I don't know if this is of any help or not, hope so. I'm off on hols on Friday btw, I'll be back in 11 days, see ya then!

It's somewhat speculation-based - purchasing supplies and/or materials over a certain value which are VAT-chargeable may require presentation of the card - see recent headlines about the cost of VAT fraud, so there's certainly a government incentive to insist.

i.e. everything a business buys/sells (threshold may apply) would be logged, but the business may not be allowed to inspect the records, and so would not be able to use the official 'VAT log' to help when doing their accounts. HMRC on the other hand, would have the info, ready to pick apart your accounts!

But ths is largely speculation, so some thought needed on methods the government would use the system to ensure they get their tax.


I don't doubt this! But I think the campaign can't start condoning tax fraud. If we stick to what the government is likely to try and do with all the information being gathered, people will be able to see how it will start to restrict any 'unlisted' activities. One thing I'm fairly sure of is people trading 'favours' (barter-style) rather than going for fully-accounted contracts, which would involve *people* agreeing on things being of equivalent value, regardless of actual price or VAT-charge. I'm wondering if e.g. community projects might get hit by this.

Absolutely agree that we cannot condone tax fraud. Present the reader with the facts and potential and they're smart enough to see all the possible implications.

The VAT and ID cards that you've explained- that would hit some sore sore toes.

When I get back from hols, I think I'm going to look into how the Royal Pharmaceutical Society feels at the prospect of being unable to dispense medicines (including life-saving drugs) to those without an ID card, as well as the 'small business' impact on them, unless anyone else has already poked about under that stone.

Finally I can post again! Joy!

Dr Wibbly, how is this going?

I'm sorry, what? I have to provide evidence of my identity before I can buy something, just because it is expensive? How does that work with online purchases of the same item?

Mr. Bester, if this whole thing goes ahead in the way that the goverment intends it to, we'll all have to have proof of our I.D. BEFORE we can purchase anything, or withdraw our own money from our bank accounts.

As regards to 'online purchases, well we do know that the government intend 'looking into' this, because of the tax loopholes involved in purchasing online.

No doubt they will have investigators scanning peoples' Paypal Accounts, Credit and Debit card transactions, and even postal orders will come under scrutiny.

I hit some mental blocks, and some of the people who I thought were going to be helpful turned out to be talking through their hats. I will re-read what I wrote but some pondering will be required before the next version!

Please do let me know if I can be any help. I understand it's a bit of a nightmare jobbie.

By the way, apropos nothing in particular, I had this email back from the Royal Pharmaceutical Society:



Ann Lewis has asked me to respond to your enquiry. The Society's Council has not yet specifically framed any policy around the issue of national ID cards as there is still little or no detail to engage with. We are tracking the progress of the Government's proposals, which appear substantially delayed and might, it has been suggested, be abandoned altogether.

I think that it is likely that the Home Office intention would be that patients would use the ID card to prove exemption from prescription charge, the checking of which is something that is in fact already undertaken in the pharmacy. The ID card might also be used for a number of purposes relating to the provision of pharmacy services, including collection of controlled drugs, ETP and potentially purposes relating to the sharing of patient information. At this point, however, all of this is speculative and we have no way of knowing the Government's intentions for how ID cards relate to pharmacy, which might well not emerge in primary legislation.

If issues or difficulties were to emerge, the Society would want to deal with them at the appropriate level. However, at this time, there is no specific mention at all of pharmacy in the Home Office's documentation on ID cards.

I hope that this reply is helpful.

Yours sincerely

Beverley Parkin

Beverley Parkin
Director of Public Affairs and Communications
Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain
1 Lambeth High Street
London SE1 7JN
Please note my new e-mail address below

Tel: 020 7572 2337
Mobile: 07947 186 688
Fax: 020 7572 2503
E-mail: beverley.parkin@rpsgb.org