HMRC gives trans people access to VIP hotline

Surely tax and pension rules are based on sex and as per the ruling (and what society has historically understood) that means biological sex. You cannot change your sex so why would any rule/law around tax and pension change if you have a GRC. Ridiculous. I feel sorry for those HMRC employees having to call Dave Dianne and pretending with pronouns etc and potentially getting into trouble for misgendering.

No doubt this only benefits TiMs.

i hear you on the rage bait thing. It’s a stupid, pointless article. I’ve just always been so puzzled by people who are obviously role playing as members of the opposite sex being so paranoid about their ‘trans history’ coming out. Literally everyone who meets them knows. It just seems the height of lack of insight

It is strange when we have transpeople on one thread saying they have absolutely no paperwork saying their sex, its impossible for anyone to know their sex. Yet we have to fund a helpline to ensure that this information that doesnt exit, remains a secret.

Ffs.

I also have a "VIP" line for HMRC due to my job role being considered in need of protection.

It takes just as long to get through, in fact, it's frequently not answered at all, and when it is, they normally have to call me back when an authorised person is available to talk to me.

I also have to call for every issue because I'm not able to have an online account for tax.

In short, it's a PITA. How sad that trans people are at risk of violence simply for existing and paying tax.

It is obviously rage bait though. You don't have to know anything more than the article says to see it's just written to wind people up, it's not actually anyone else's business how trans people interact with HMRC, nor does it affect anyone else.

You could also have spent 2 seconds googling and you would have learned both that this is a longstanding policy and why it is in place.

I still think some trans identified people might feel they are being treated differently, because they don't have a GRC, because if they didn't know about the "special hotline" before, they probably will now. But, I guess that's their lookout.

Trans people through necessity are usually fully aware of the processes they need to go through to update their data and don't need The Telegraph to tell them about it.

Well sure, but given that this is the system we have, it seems weird for the telegraph to be suddenly making a big thing about the fact that the HMRC is simply administering the data implications of that system.

As someone said above, it is pure rage bait. The telegraph knows that there are a lot of people pissed off about HMRC delays who can easily be frothed up into outrage by the thought that trans people are queue-jumping and the telegraph is always keen to find new ways of trying to make us think that tax collection is evil.

But there aren't enough people with GRCs for their marginally better tax service to make the service provided to everyone else any worse than it would have been. And there are probably other random reasons why some people get a better service, too. Perhaps you do better if your surname begins with a letter higher up the alphabet, or if your call happens to go through to Call Centre A rather than Call Centre B, or whatever other white noise effects a huge system

There is two special helplines. One for all people covered by the PC of GR which helps them hide their sex on a DBS check.

And this one, that helps those with a GRC. The tax office only recognises people as trans with a GRC. I dont know if a GRC triggers a new NI number? It could be complicated if someone has had two.

Because like it or not trans people have a right to privacy and to protection from discrimination and harassment. Seriously, you've spent this entire thread making nasty comments about trans people and now you have the nerve to wonder why it might be important to them to keep this information confidential?

ok. thanks, you could've just explained it that clearly from the start, instead of accusing us of discussing "rage bait." I'm genuinely interested in this, and why the Telegraph is bringing it up now, if it's not a new thing.

I still think some trans identified people might feel they are being treated differently, because they don't have a GRC, because if they didn't know about the "special hotline" before, they probably will now. But, I guess that's their lookout.

Because….?

Because it's special category data under GDPR law.

But why does it need to be a secret?

even if you couldn’t tell someone’s sex just by looking at them (you can by the way), why this weird squeamishness about people knowing who you really are?

I think you'll find the queue is faster than obtaining two years worth of evidence for a GRC.

Just because you haven't figured out the obvious fact that by definition you would not know how many trans people you've met without realising they were trans, doesn't mean we have to build processes and legislation around the same fallacy.

Fucking brilliant. I have a boring tax question so I’m identifying as trans and jumping that filthy old queue

But why?

given that you can tell the sex of a person by looking at them, what is achieved by trying to keep the fact that they’re role playing as a member of the opposite sex confidential? Literally everyone who meets them knows precisely what’s going on

What? You're not even making sense at this point.

I'll spell it out in tiny words for you: when a trans person gets a GRC, they need to inform HMRC to update their pension entitlements to reflect their new legal sex. Because HMRC can't entirely expunge their previous information from the system without bolloxing up their pension, they necessarily have to hold the information that this person is transgender. As such, they protect their confidentiality by having their records dealt with a special team. A trans person without a GRC doesn't need this same protection because their record won't record that they are transgender as they won't have been able to update it yet. There's no case for discrimination since there's a legitimate reason for the different treatment and because if a trans person really wants to access the GRC service they can just get a GRC. And because frankly 10 extra minutes on hold is hardly a serious enough disparity to warrant a court case.

Thanks, that explains it much more clearly than the article, and the previous poster.

I would still be interested to see what non- GRC trans identified people think about this. Surely, some of their records have also been changed, or can you only do that with a GRC?

Tax records that span either side of a person's decision to obfuscate their sex by means of a GRC. Plus, the fact that gender reassignment is sensitive data for the purposes of the GDPR so is processed slightly differently from other data.

Nothing to do with 'proportionate ends to legitimate aim' etc. Just data protection protocols.

So what's the 'legitimate aim' here?
Every individual's data will be processed according to DPA/GDPR so won't be shared beyond what's essential for the processing.
In what way would a person's trans status be relevant to VAT or PAYE? If someone wants to change their gender marker on their record perhaps, but again it would be subject to data protection the same as anything else.
All I can think of is complaints of being questioned during ID verification because Pam Smith sounds more like Peter Smith. In which case it's all a farce anyway.

And it needs to be a secret because…?

Yes, they can, they're one of the few services that has a legitimate reason to ask for one, because your pension entitlement can't be changed without one.

There are additional data protection complexities for people with a GRC,

are there? What are they please?

The article says HMRC are providing this service on the basis of having a GRC, which is "gender reassignment."

The service at Public Department 1 is not that much better than the general HMRC service unless they've improved considerably in the last 10 years