The number of financial penalties imposed on (a) company directors for an offence related to the registration requirements for People with Significant Control under Part 21A of the Companies Act 2006 for each year since 2016 is:

2016 is nil

2017 is nil

2018 (from 1st March 2018) is 19

2019 is 134

2020 is 28

2021 is 95

2022 (up to 30^th September 2022) is 71

The number of financial penalties imposed on (b) other company officers is nil.

The total value of financial penalties imposed on (a) company directors for an offence related to the registration requirements for People with Significant Control under Part 21A of the Companies Act 2006 for each year since 2016 is:

2016 is nil

2017 is nil

2018 (from 1 March 2018) is £5,270.00

2019 is £42,421.00

2020 is £8,960.00

2021 is £51,978.00

2022 (up to 30^th September) is £33,585.00

The total value of financial penalties imposed on (b) other company officers is nil.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on the number of defendants prosecuted and convicted, for various offences under the Companies Act 2006, for the years 2017-2021 in the Outcomes by Offence data tool 2021, and for preceding years in the Outcomes by Offence tool 2020.

However, the role of the person or business being prosecuted or convicted, including whether they were company director or company officers is not held centrally in the Court Proceedings database. This information may be held on court records but to examine individual court records would be of disproportionate costs.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on the number of defendants prosecuted and convicted, for various offences under the Companies Act 2006, for the years 2017-2021 in the Outcomes by Offence data tool 2021, and for preceding years in the Outcomes by Offence tool 2020.

However, the role of the person or business being prosecuted or convicted, including whether they were company director or company officers is not held centrally in the Court Proceedings database. This information may be held on court records but to examine individual court records would be of disproportionate costs.

The Insolvency Service receives reports on directors’ conduct, in particular of companies entering formal insolvency procedures.

Cases with reports of director misconduct are considered in line with the Insolvency Service’s acceptance criteria. The most serious cases are vetted and where appropriate taken forward for investigation.

Information from Insolvency Service internal management systems shows the number of cases vetted and investigations commenced with a view to director disqualification in the last 5 years. The latter includes a number of cases where the investigation commenced as a result of information from another source.

Companies vetted in any one year may be taken forward for investigation in a later year. The figures in the table relate to the number of companies not the number of directors. An investigation may encompass more than one company.

The first column excludes companies vetted in compulsory liquidation cases prior to January 2020.

The UK Endorsement Board has been delegated powers to consider new international accounting standards for UK adoption only; it has no remit over audit policy and audit standards.

This includes an assessment of the compatibility of new standards with the requirements of the International Accounting Standards and European Public Limited-Liability Company (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 No. 685 (IAS Regulations). The IAS Regulations require that “the standard meets the criteria of understandability, relevance, reliability and comparability required of the financial information needed for making economic decisions and assessing the stewardship of management.” These requirements were on-shored from EU legislation on the UK’s exit from the EU and have long been understood in the context of adoption of international accounting standards.

Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 already requires directors to have regard to the impact of their company’s operations on the community and the environment, amongst other things. The Government strengthened this requirement in 2019 by requiring directors to make an annual statement explaining how they have discharged their section 172 duty in practice over the previous reporting year.

The Government believes the most effective way to encourage companies to address environmental and other challenges is through a transparent corporate reporting framework. This month, the UK became the first G20 country to introduce mandatory reporting in line with the recommendations of the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, for economically significant UK companies. This will ensure that businesses consider the risks and opportunities they face on climate change and encourage them to set out their emission reduction plans and sustainability credentials. The Government has also published a landmark Roadmap on Sustainable Investing, the first phase of which will introduce new economy-wide sustainability disclosure requirements.

The directors of a company have a duty to prepare a strategic report and are responsible for its contents and their judgements. The auditor is required to review the strategic report and, based on the work done during the audit of the accounts, to state whether information in the strategic report is consistent with the accounts and has been prepared in accordance with applicable legal requirements. Both the directors and the auditor are accountable to the shareholders of the company for the contents of the strategic report.

The Financial Reporting Council, through its Supervision Committee, reviews the annual reports of public and large private companies for compliance with the law. The FRC’s corporate reporting review work does not duplicate the role of directors or auditors. Directors are responsible for the judgements in the strategic report, not the FRC’s Supervision Committee.

The Government will publish a post-implementation review of non-financial reporting regulations shortly. The post implementation review will cover both the 2013 regulations, which introduced the requirement for a strategic report, and the 2016 regulations requiring reporting on environmental, social and community matters, applicable to large Public Interest Entities.