header-logo header-logo

No to unfair tax on compensation for infected blood families

14 May 2025
Issue: 8116 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury , Health , Compensation , Inheritance tax
printer mail-detail
Lawyers have uncovered a major inheritance tax oversight affecting thousands of families of victims of the infected blood scandal

More than 30,000 people in the UK were infected with HIV and hepatitis C after being given contaminated blood products in the 1970s and 1980s. The Infected Blood Inquiry published its final report last year, and the government has so far allocated £11.8bn in compensation. Due to the length of time that has passed, however, many of the people due compensation have since died.

At a special hearing of the inquiry last week, the inquiry’s chair, Sir Brian Langstaff heard only 106 people have received payments so far, with a further 54 receiving offers. About 140,000 victims, including bereaved parents, children, and siblings are still waiting for compensation.

The Association of Lifetime Lawyers (ALL) and STEP are now campaigning for legislation to stop HM Revenue and Customs seizing a sizeable proportion of the payments.

They explain that, while HMRC has pledged not to levy inheritance tax on the compensation, the payments are now going to deceased victims’ estates and will be taxed when passed on to someone else—a situation known as a ‘secondary transfer’.

Jade Gani, lawyer and spokesperson for ALL and STEP, said: ‘While working with a family that was affected by the infected blood scandal, I identified that they and others may now face a secondary injustice with an unfair and unexpected tax on their compensation.

‘We’re currently in talks with HMRC and are grateful for their ongoing engagement, responsiveness and proactive efforts in addressing the inheritance tax implications for families affected by the Infected Blood scandal.’

ALL, STEP and Ten Old Square chambers are working with HMRC to draft legislation to address the secondary transfer issue.

Gani said: We are encouraged by the progress being made so far, and are hopeful that legislative change will bring about a fair and compassionate resolution.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll