The UK’s tax authority, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), and the British Film Institute (BFI) have responded to allegations a small number of UK producers have been using circular loans to inflate budgets and thereby to make fraudulent claims for UK film tax credit support.
UK-based producer-financier Alan Latham was named by The Guardian and The Times newspapers in early November 2025 as having tried to access millions of pounds in tax incentives for films that had received only interim tax incentives, or that had received final tax credits, but allegedly for budgets far higher than the actual costs of making the films.
Latham did not respond to Screen’s request for comment for this story.
“We take compliance in Creative Industry Tax Reliefs seriously and work across government to tackle risks and protect public funds,” an HMRC spokesperson told Screen in response to the allegations that Latham had broken rules both on connected party transactions and inflation of expenditure.
“Our approach is clear: stop error and fraud before they enter the system, encourage compliance, and act swiftly when rules are broken.”
A BFI spokesperson also insisted robust measures are in place to stop abuse of the tax reliefs. “The Unit maintains communication with the applicant throughout the process, requesting additional information as required,” they said. “It ensures companies are aware of the requirement for them to fully comply with the certification process and complete the process in applying for final certification.”
Among other regulations, the BFI Certification Unit requires all applications to be sworn under oath by the person applying.
One particular concern now is that considerable public funds may have been lost if producers claimed interim tax credits and then liquidated their companies without returning the money.
HMRC rules state that if the production company does not submit a final certificate, “then any FTR [Film Tax Relief] paid…is no longer due and will have to be repaid to HMRC by the production company”.
Not applying for a final certificate is not always an indicator of fraudulent behaviour. For example, where a film is abandoned, a final certificate is not required. However, the company must notify HMRC and the BFI that the film has been abandoned and must still have had a valid interim certificate to claim any relief.
Liquidation
Films with which Latham has been involved include Await Further Instructions, Bliss!, Dusty & Me, Killers Anonymous, For Love Or Money, City Girls (an Elizabeth Hurley vehicle abandoned during Covid), The Intergalactic Adventures Of Max Cloud, the Mister Mayfair series, and Waiting For Anya, among many more.
According to information seen by Screen, just a handful of these projects, including My Dad’s Christmas Date, The Comedian’s Guide To Survival, In Extremis, Waiting For Anya and The Bet, received final certificates.
It is unclear whether any repayments have been made on films that only received interim certificates.
Latham’s holding company, Highfield Grange Production Services, entered liquidation last year, writing off film investments of £20.4m. When contacted by Screen for this story, a spokesperson for the liquidator Begbies Traynor declined to give further details of the case. “Due to the ongoing potential legal actions, other investigations, general sensitivity and confidentiality, I cannot say any more,” the spokesperson commented.
Although HMRC does not comment on individual cases, Screen understands it is “actively pursuing” those who may have put public funds at risk.
No comments yet