Browse regulations

This Order extends the Children (Scotland) Act 2014 provisions to various UK-wide social security benefit regulations (Income Support, Jobseeker's Allowance, State Pension Credit, Housing Benefit, Employment and Support Allowance). It adds section 26A of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 (duty to provide continuing care) to lists of payments that are disregarded when calculating income and capital for means-tested benefits. It also specifies age thresholds (16+ for section 26A payments, 18+ for others) and establishes rules for pass-through payments where a young person in continuing care passes payments to their former carer.

Without this Order, young persons aged 16-17 receiving continuing care payments under section 26A of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 would have these payments counted as income/capital for means-tested benefits, effectively penalising vulnerable looked-after children transitioning to independence. The Order ensures the policy intent of the Children (Scotland) Act 2014 is honoured without expanding welfare spending. While the underlying means-tested benefit system involves government intervention, this technical modification prevents a specific unintended consequence: leaving young care leavers worse off than if they received no continuing care support.

These Regulations bring into force various provisions of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 on specified dates (13th July, 1st October, and 31st October 2016). They include transitional provisions and savings for neighbourhood planning, compulsory purchase procedures, self-build and custom housebuilding, new towns, sustainable drainage, and estate agent regulation. The regulations also amend the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 to adjust commencement references.

This is a commencement order that merely activates provisions already enacted by Parliament in the Housing and Planning Act 2016. It does not itself impose regulatory burden — the substantive provisions being activated were already approved through primary legislation. Deleting this instrument would create legal uncertainty by leaving important statutory provisions in limbo, as the default position under UK law is that provisions not brought into force remain dormant. The regulatory burdens identified in the underlying sections (compulsory purchase powers, planning controls, etc.) are matters for primary legislation review, not for a procedural commencement instrument.

This is a correction order that fixes errors in the Progress Power (Gas Fired Power Station) Order 2015. It provides a table specifying where corrections are needed, what type of correction (substitution, insertion, or omission), and the corrected text. Signed by the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, it came into force on 12th July 2016.

This is a technical correction order that removes legal ambiguity from a prior statutory instrument, not new regulation. Without correction, the 2015 Order would contain errors creating legal uncertainty around the gas fired power station project—uncertainty that could spawn litigation, delay investment, and harm both developers and consumers. Legal clarity and clearly defined property rights are prerequisites for a functioning free market; leaving known errors uncorrected serves no ideological purpose and merely creates unnecessary transaction costs.

A correction order that fixes errors in the Ferrybridge Multifuel 2 Power Station Order 2015 by providing a table of corrections where column 1 indicates location, column 2 indicates method of correction, and column 3 provides the corrected text. Technical/administrative in nature, it has no independent regulatory purpose beyond rectifying clerical mistakes in the parent instrument.

This is a purely clerical correction instrument with no independent regulatory burden. It merely fixes errors in the 2015 Order to ensure legal clarity. Deleting it would leave uncorrected mistakes in the statute book, creating legal uncertainty without any corresponding liberalisation benefit. Unlike substantive regulations that impose costs through restrictions or requirements, a correction order simply restores legal accuracy.

Technical amendment regulations that update cross-references to EU Directive 2008/98/EC (the Waste Framework Directive) across multiple UK statutory instruments, correcting dates from 18 November 2008 to 19 November 2008 and standardizing the definition of 'the Waste Directive' or 'the Waste Framework Directive' in 12 different regulations spanning Environmental Protection Act, Marine and Coastal Access Act, End-of-Life Vehicles Regulations, Hazardous Waste Regulations, Packaging Waste Regulations, Environmental Permitting Regulations, Marine Licensing Order, Waste Regulations, Climate Change Agreements Regulations, Waste and Emissions Trading Act amendments, and Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations.

This regulation imposes no new regulatory burden—it is purely a technical clarification that standardizes outdated cross-references and corrects a date error across multiple instruments. Deleting it would leave inconsistent, legally confusing definitions in place without any benefit. The amendments ensure legal clarity and consistency, which the market and citizens benefit from. Removing this housekeeping provision would create uncertainty in waste management law without reducing a single compliance obligation.

A temporary electoral registration pilot scheme for England that modified annual canvass procedures in specified areas, allowing registration officers to use various contact methods (forms, visits, telephone, electronic) instead of strict statutory requirements. The scheme operated from its making date until July 6, 2018.

This Order ceased to have effect on July 6, 2018 and is already legally obsolete. As a time-limited pilot, it served its purpose and should be removed from the statute books entirely. Its retention serves no current function and adds unnecessary complexity to the legislative record. If similar electoral registration reforms are desired, they should undergo fresh parliamentary scrutiny rather than rely on expired pilot provisions.

A commencement order bringing into force on 8th August 2016 certain provisions of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 relating to enforcement powers in relation to ships, specifically sections 35, 36, 37, 39 and Schedule 2, covering England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.

Modern slavery represents the most extreme violation of individual liberty and free markets - the reduction of human beings to property. These provisions establish enforcement powers for authorities to board, search, and detain ships suspected of carrying trafficking victims. Without these powers, authorities would lack legal basis to intercept suspected slavery vessels, leaving victims in captivity and allowing traffickers to operate with impunity. The enforcement mechanism is targeted at serious crimes of coercion rather than legitimate economic activity, and deletion would leave Britons significantly worse off by removing the legal tools needed to combat human trafficking.

The Companies (Disclosure of Information) (Specified Persons) Order 2016 amends the Companies Act 1985 to add specified persons who may receive company information: HMRC Commissioners, SFO Director, the registrar of companies, and the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority. It provides a legal framework for information disclosure to these bodies.

This regulation grants law enforcement and regulatory bodies enhanced access to company information without sufficient justification for why private contractual arrangements or existing statutory powers would be inadequate. The SFO and HMRC already possess broad investigative powers under their own legislation. The GLAA's addition is particularly questionable given concerns about mission creep in labour market enforcement. Such blanket designations create compliance burdens and potential for information overreach, with no demonstrated market failure requiring this specific intervention. The regulation establishes a framework that could be exploited for purposes beyond its stated intent, with inadequate safeguards against abuse.

Amendment Regulations that modify the Electricity Capacity Regulations 2014 and Electricity Capacity (Supplier Payment etc.) Regulations 2014, primarily providing transitional provisions for how new amendments apply to existing capacity agreements and auctions, including DSR transitional auctions. The regulations define key terms and specify which amendments do not apply to pre-existing capacity arrangements.

While the Capacity Market scheme itself represents government intervention in electricity markets, these 2016 Amendment Regulations are primarily technical corrections with transitional provisions that provide legal clarity and prevent disruption to existing capacity agreements awarded before their effective date. Deleting them would create legal uncertainty around the application of amended rules to existing contracts and could disrupt the functioning of the capacity auction system, harming both generators and consumers who have entered into binding agreements under the existing regulatory framework. The transitional provisions specifically protect legitimate expectations of market participants.

Amends Income Support, Jobseeker's Allowance, Housing Benefit, Employment and Support Allowance, and Universal Credit Regulations to define treatment of postgraduate master's degree loans and special support loans for benefit calculation purposes. Postgraduate master's degree loans are treated similarly to undergraduate student loans, with 30% of the maximum loan amount counted as income. Special support loans are disregarded as income.

This regulation provides necessary consistency in how postgraduate master's degree loans are treated across benefits, applying the same 30% income attribution already used for undergraduate student loans. Without this amendment, students pursuing postgraduate education would face arbitrary gaps in benefit treatment. The 30% treatment reflects that these loans are financing instruments for living costs, not disposable income. Deleting this would harm students undertaking postgraduate study and create administrative chaos across multiple benefit regimes without reducing actual welfare spending.

These regulations, effective October 2016, establish the framework for water and sewerage undertakers in England to exit the non-household retail market, transferring customers to private 'eligible licensees'. They mandate exit application procedures, WSRA approval, customer notification requirements, transfer schemes with prescribed terms, and ongoing WSRA oversight of licensees. The regulations create a permissioned market structure where only licensed entities on WSRA-maintained lists can serve transferred customers, with extensive government control over transition terms and conditions.

These regulations substitute government-directed restructuring for market mechanisms. The mandatory exit application process, WSRA-maintained 'eligible licensee' lists creating de facto entry barriers, prescribed transfer schemes with government-dictated terms, and ongoing price/condition controls through the code regime all represent bureaucratic orchestration of market entry rather than genuine liberalisation. While they enabled private retailer participation, they do so through heavy regulatory scaffolding that constrains commercial freedom and establishes the WSRA as a central planner of the water retail sector. A truly free market would allow companies to structure their commercial relationships without requiring government permission, application processes, or mandated terms and conditions.

Amendment rules that update definitions in the 2003 Rules to incorporate references to the Recall of MPs Act 2015, expand the definition of 'forfeiture order' to cover additional types of orders under the 2015 Act, broaden the definition of 'respondent' to include additional parties, and add a new Form C to the Schedule.

These are technical procedural rules governing court processes for forfeiting political donations. Without clear procedural definitions, courts would lack lawful authority to issue forfeiture orders, potentially allowing improperly obtained political funds to remain in circulation. While political donation regulations can raise free speech concerns, this instrument merely updates procedural definitions to reflect the 2015 Act — it does not itself impose restrictions on donations. Deletion would create procedural gaps in election finance enforcement without providing alternative mechanisms.

This Order amends two earlier statutory instruments (the Reserve Forces Acts 1980 and 1982 (Isle of Man) Order 1986 and the Reserve Forces Act 1996 (Isle of Man) Order 2010) to incorporate references to amendments made by the Defence Reform Act 2014, extends certain provisions to the Isle of Man by inserting 'and the Isle of Man' after 'United Kingdom' in Schedule 9, and omits paragraph 7 from the Schedule.

This is a purely technical amendment that ensures legal consistency between UK reserve forces legislation and its application to the Isle of Man. It does not impose new regulatory burdens on businesses, distort market incentives, or create compliance costs. Deleting it would create legal uncertainty and fragmentation in how reserve forces legislation applies across UK territories. The Defence Reform Act 2014 amendments would remain in force anyway; this Order merely ensures proper coordination with Isle of Man law.

Amends the Income Tax (Pay As You Earn) Regulations 2003 to require employers to provide employees with information about non-approved mileage allowance payments and non-approved passenger payments. Also inserts definitions for 'approved mileage allowance payments', 'approved passenger payments', 'mileage allowance payments', and 'passenger payments' referencing corresponding sections of ITEPA 2003.

Without this regulation, employees receiving non-approved mileage or passenger payments would lack clarity on the tax status of these payments, potentially leading to unexpected tax liabilities and inadvertent non-compliance. The definitional amendments provide useful cross-references to ITEPA. While any reporting requirement imposes some administrative cost, this is minimal and proportionate to the risk of widespread misunderstanding about approved vs non-approved travel payments. The transparency benefit to employees justifies the small compliance burden.

The Double Taxation Relief (Isle of Man) Order 2016 declares an Exchange of Letters and Arrangement with the Isle of Man government that updates double taxation relief arrangements for income tax and corporation tax. It supersedes earlier Orders from 1955, 1991, 1994, 2009, and 2013, with the aim of providing relief from double taxation in relation to taxes on income imposed by either jurisdiction.

Double taxation is a barrier to international trade and capital flows. This treaty-style arrangement removes that barrier by preventing the same income from being taxed in both jurisdictions, which facilitates cross-border commerce between Britain and the Isle of Man. Unlike restrictive regulation that suppresses voluntary exchange, this agreement promotes it. Deleting this relief would restore a punitive double taxation regime that harms British businesses and individuals engaged in lawful economic activity with our Crown dependencies.