Browse regulations

These Regulations appoint 6th June 2022 as the day on which Schedule 6 to the Finance Act 2022 (concerning dormant assets) comes into force. They are a commencement order that activates the substantive provisions of that Schedule.

Dormant asset schemes allow the state to seize and redistribute private property that has remained unclaimed for a specified period, rather than preserving it for rightful owners. This represents a regulatory taking of private property — the original owners or their heirs should be able to reclaim their assets without bureaucratic obstacles. Deleting this commencement order would prevent Schedule 6 from activating, leaving the dormant asset regime inactive and preserving private property rights.

Consequential amendments to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Procedure) Rules 2003 and Immigration (Biometric Registration) Regulations 2008, adding cross-references to new section 2F of the 1997 Act and updating definitional references to incorporate appeals under the Nationality and Borders Act 2022. Primarily machinery changes to procedural rules governing immigration appeals.

These are purely technical consequential amendments that merely update cross-references and definitions in existing procedural rules. They add no new regulatory burdens, impose no new economic restrictions, and create no compliance costs. Deleting them would create procedural gaps and legal uncertainty without any corresponding economic benefit. The rules simply ensure the Special Immigration Appeals Commission can function properly with updated references.

The Alternative Finance (Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax and Corporation Tax) Order 2022 amends tax statutes (ITA 2007, TCGA 1992, CTA 2009, ITEPA 2003) to expand the scope of 'alternative finance' arrangements eligible for special tax treatment. Key changes: (1) replaces 'financial institution' with broader 'person' in definitions of first owner; (2) introduces 'regulated electronic system facilitated arrangements' to bring peer-to-peer lending platforms within scope; (3) modifies purchase and resale arrangements to allow non-institutional first owners; (4) updates terminology from 'institution' to 'first owner' throughout.

While this Order liberalizes eligibility by allowing non-financial institutions to serve as first owners in alternative finance arrangements, it introduces new regulatory concepts ('regulated electronic system facilitated arrangements') that add compliance complexity and create a two-tier system based on how arrangements are facilitated. The fundamental problem is that special tax treatment for alternative finance arrangements—designed to put Islamic finance on par with conventional lending—distorts the market by creating preferential treatment for certain financial structures. A genuinely free-market approach would eliminate all special tax treatment for alternative finance entirely, rather than expanding which arrangements qualify for favorable treatment. The Order perpetuates the distortive framework while adding regulatory definitions that could stifle fintech innovation through compliance burden.

The M25 Junction 28 Development Consent Order 2022 grants development consent for National Highways to improve Junction 28 of the M25 (near Brentwood, Essex), including widening the motorway between junctions 27-29, constructing new slip roads, realigning local roads, and associated drainage and environmental mitigation works. The Order contains compulsory purchase powers, traffic management provisions, road classification schedules, and requirements for environmental management. It comes into force on 6th June 2022.

This Order enables critical infrastructure that reduces the substantial economic cost of congestion at one of the UK's most congested motorway junctions. Deletion would prevent the M25 improvement scheme entirely, perpetuating estimated annual congestion costs in the billions. The environmental requirements and assessment provisions are necessary legal safeguards to obtain development consent and prevent environmental harm. This is enabling legislation for infrastructure, not restrictive regulation—road infrastructure investment demonstrably boosts economic productivity and connectivity. The regulatory framework is proportionate and necessary for delivering a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project of this scale.

These Regulations establish the procedural framework for civil enforcement of road traffic contraventions in England, including rights to make representations against penalty charge notices and appeals to adjudicators. Key mechanisms include: 28-day periods for making representations, 56-day periods for enforcement authority decisions, adjudicator appeal rights, and provisions for immobilisation device and vehicle removal cases. The Regulations work in conjunction with the 2022 General Regulations and the Traffic Management Act 2004.

This regulation creates a multi-layered bureaucratic appeals machinery for traffic penalty charges that adds significant administrative cost and delay without commensurate benefit. The adjudicator system constitutes a quasi-judicial layer that increases enforcement costs while discouraging efficient resolution. As procedural implementing regulations for a primary enforcement regime, deletion would not remove the underlying enforcement authority but would eliminate unnecessary procedural froth. The 28/56-day response timeframes and multiple representation stages create opportunities for regulatory gaming and extended non-resolution. Most fundamentally, this is part of a broader retained EU law framework for traffic enforcement that was never subject to democratic scrutiny in Parliament — a bureaucratic accretion inconsistent with post-Brexit regulatory independence.

The Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (Amendment) Order 2022 amends the 2008 Order by: (1) refining the definition of 'horticulture industry', (2) narrowing levy scope under article 6(1), (3) permitting charges for Board services, (4) updating ballot requirements including 5-yearly votes on levy spending and allowing levy continuation ballots, (5) removing horticulture and potato sectors from voting entitlements in article 12, and (6) omitting Parts 4 (horticulture) and 6 (potatoes) from Schedule 3 levies. The net effect is to remove mandatory statutory levies on horticulture and potato producers while maintaining levy arrangements for other sectors.

This amendment reduces regulatory burden by eliminating mandatory statutory levies on horticulture and potato producers—a form of coercive taxation that forces these businesses to fund activities they may not support. The amendment introduces market-friendly reforms: horticulture and potato sectors can now opt out of contributing to the AHDB, reducing their costs and removing an unfunded mandate. Deleting this regulation would reinstate those levies, harming approximately 5,000+ horticulture and potato businesses who would again be legally compelled to pay. While further deregulation would be preferable, this amendment moves in the right direction by giving these sectors freedom from mandatory levy contribution.

These Regulations implement procedural requirements for notices under section 2(1)(c) of the Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Act 2022 regarding business lease exemptions. They specify required content (address, business purpose declarations, statutory exception statements), formatting rules (notice must not form part of the lease instrument), and delivery methods (personal service, post, electronic communication, or other accepted means). The regulations apply to England and Wales and came into force on 30th June 2022.

While these regulations impose administrative requirements on landlords claiming the business lease exemption from the Act's ground rent caps, deletion would leave tenants without formal notification of their status and the basis for any exemption. The notice requirement is a light-touch, low-cost procedural safeguard that enforces transparency around the statutory exception. The regulation does not restrict competition, create unnecessary barriers, or distort market incentives—it merely documents an existing legal position and ensures tenants receive clear information. Without this framework, the substantive exemption could be invoked without proper tenant awareness, causing greater harm.

Amendment to Immigration and Nationality (Fees) Regulations 2018, adding: (1) fee exemptions for Ukraine Scheme entry clearance and leave to remain; (2) £715 fee for High Potential Individual visa; (3) fee exemptions for children looked after by local authorities applying for British citizenship registration; (4) discretion to waive fees for children on affordability grounds; (5) extensions to Isle of Man, Guernsey, and Jersey.

These regulations primarily create fee exemptions and waivers rather than impose burdens. Removing them would harm vulnerable children in local authority care who gain fee relief for citizenship registration, and would create legal uncertainty around Ukraine Scheme fees that are already being processed. The modest £715 High Potential Individual fee is competitive globally and reflects processing costs. While the underlying immigration fee system involves government pricing decisions rather than pure market mechanisms, deleting this amending instrument would create administrative chaos and leave existing fee structures without proper legal coverage for new schemes already in operation.

These Regulations are a commencement order that brings the Dormant Assets Act 2022 into force on 6th June 2022. The Dormant Assets Act 2022 establishes a scheme for transferring dormant assets (unclaimed bank accounts, insurance policies, etc.) to approved social and environmental causes via a statutory levy on the financial sector.

This is a procedural commencement instrument with no independent regulatory burden. The Dormant Assets Act 2022 redirects unclaimed financial assets to social purposes rather than escheating to the state—an efficient use of existing resources that imposes no new restrictions on economic activity, trade, or market entry. Without proper commencement, legal uncertainty would arise regarding when the Act's provisions take effect, potentially disrupting the dormant assets scheme and leaving unclaimed funds in limbo rather than serving charitable purposes.

These Regulations amend the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Surcharge) Order 2012 by substituting new surcharge tables for England and Wales. They set mandatory financial surcharges (ranging from £20 to £228) imposed on offenders at sentencing, applicable to various orders including conditional discharges, fines, community orders, custodial sentences, and suspended sentences. Table 1 covers standard surcharges for specific order types; Table 2 provides a detailed schedule based on sentence length; Table 3 applies 40% of fine value (capped at £2,000) for conditional discharges with fines. Transitional provisions preserve pre-June 2022 surcharges for offenses committed before the Regulations came into force.

These surcharges function as a hidden tax on conviction, set by secondary legislation with no market mechanism or democratic accountability. The fixed amounts (£20 to £228) are arbitrary figures not tied to actual victim costs or rehabilitation expenses. The 40% surcharge on fines with a £2,000 cap creates a non-linear, punitive structure. Such financial penalties added to sentences increase the financial burden on offenders without demonstrable corresponding benefits—revenue goes to the Treasury, not victims. The complexity of three separate tables based on sentence type, length, and context creates compliance uncertainty. Parliamentary scrutiny of statutory instruments setting these exact amounts is minimal, making this a textbook example of regulatory burden imposed without proper democratic review.

Commencement order bringing Section 11 of the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 into force on 27 May 2022. Section 11 mandates that large fuel retailers and specified entities provide public electric vehicle charging or refuelling points.

This regulation enforces a mandate requiring private businesses (large fuel retailers) to provide EV charging infrastructure against their commercial judgment. Such mandates distort the market mechanism — the state cannot know where charging infrastructure is most needed, and forced provision risks over-building in some areas while leaving genuine gaps elsewhere. Private retailers should decide based on demand signals whether to invest in charging facilities. Mandates of this type raise costs for retailers, may advantage large chains over smaller competitors, and represent government picking technological winners rather than allowing the market to allocate resources efficiently. Network effects in EV adoption should be addressed through price signals and consumer demand, not compelled provision.

Amends the Customs (Export) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 by extending three deadline dates from 2022 to 2023 for oral export declarations by individuals and export declarations by conduct for certain goods with pedestrians and vehicles.

This regulation merely extends transitional deadlines for customs export declaration requirements by one year. It perpetuates a regime of burdensome procedural requirements for exports that adds cost and friction to trade. Rather than reducing this regulatory overhead, it keeps it alive for another year. A genuinely free-trading Britain should be simplifying and abolishing such customs formalities, not extending them. The underlying compliance costs and administrative barriers to export remain unaddressed.

Commencement regulations bringing into force provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 on 28th June 2022, with transitional and saving provisions in Schedule 2. Defines key terms including the 1971 Act, 2022 Act, appointed day, and Refugee Convention. Extends to all UK jurisdictions with certain provisions applying to England and Wales only.

This is a procedural commencement instrument that merely activates substantive provisions of the 2022 Act on a specified date and provides transitional/saving provisions to prevent legal disruption. It imposes no independent regulatory burden — any costs or benefits flow from the underlying Act's provisions, not from this instrument. Deleting it would merely delay the orderly commencement of immigration reforms without eliminating any regulatory requirement.

These Regulations establish criteria for nominating ordinary members to Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) under the NHS Act 2006. They define when NHS trusts meet the 'forward plan condition' or 'level of services provided condition' to qualify for ICB representation, set out how patient groups are determined, and prescribe which primary medical service providers may be nominated. The Regulations include transitional provisions for initial ICBs established before 1st July 2022 and financial years beginning before 1st April 2024.

These Regulations represent bureaucratic governance procedures for NHS Integrated Care Boards, a structure that institutionalises the NHS's state healthcare monopoly. The complex criteria for trust representation (forward plan condition, level of services condition), the intricate definitions of patient groups and in-scope income, and the transitional provisions spanning multiple financial years demonstrate the excessive administrative burden that characterises NHS governance. Rather than promoting efficiency or accountability, this regulation adds layers of procedural complexity to a monopolistic public healthcare system. Britons would benefit more from deregulation that reduces barriers to private healthcare alternatives than from retaining this internal NHS governance paperwork.

Amends the Green Gas Support Scheme Regulations 2021 to adjust tariff calculations for inflation using CPI when guarantee and tariff start dates fall in different financial years, modifies definitions for estimated annual payments, and extends financial year references from 2025/2026 to 2027/2028.

The Green Gas Support Scheme is a subsidy regime that distorts energy markets by guaranteeing revenue streams to biomethane producers, picking winners rather than allowing market competition. This amendment maintains and extends this distortionary framework. Such subsidies: create dependency among recipients; misallocate capital to politically favoured technologies rather than genuinely competitive solutions; impose unseen costs on energy consumers through higher system costs; and add regulatory complexity that benefits large established players over new entrants. The CPI adjustment mechanism merely fine-tunes the subsidy calculation without addressing the fundamental problem of state-directed resource allocation. Government guarantee schemes for specific energy technologies, regardless of technical refinement, run counter to Britain's tradition of free-market dynamism that produced the Industrial Revolution.