Skip to content

Brought to you by

Dentons logo in black and white

UK Planning Law Blog

Real opinions on the alphabet soup of planning and development from s106 agreements to CIL, PDR to DCO, BIDs to UBR, viability to profits for everyone

open menu close menu

UK Planning Law Blog

  • Planning TV
  • Who We Are

A Modest Proposal – CIL Regulations Made Less of Burden

By Roy Pinnock
July 1, 2020
  • Community Infrastructure Levy
  • Coronavirus/ COVID-19
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn

Our previous CIL blog highlighted the need for changes to CIL to provide a way through Lockdown and then ensure long term resilience. The Government’s changes will provide some relief for SME builders, if they are willing to lay their finances bare.

Deferral powers

The Government delivered on its 13 May 2020 commitment to flex the CIL system, by laying the further CIL amendment regulations.  The changes are necessary because some elements of CIL liability cannot currently be paused or waived, notwithstanding flexible approaches by some collecting authorities (not least late payment interest, which keeps running at 2.5% above base regardless of informal deferral agreements).

The changes will allow collecting authorities time-limited discretionary powers to:

  • defer CIL payments for up to 6 months (reg.72A)
  • disapply late payment interest and surcharge payments (reg. 72A – again, up to 6 months)
  • credit interest already charged to the developer (reg.72B).

Authorities will have 40 days to deal with a deferral request, as soon as practicable – during which the late payment clock stops for interest and surcharge purposes. The determination period is then subtracted from the extension period. 

The deferral request must be no more than 14 days before the due date (and ASAP), for liabilities due after the Regulations come into force.  The powers provide scope – in theory – to push liability out to mid-February 2022.

Timing

The process for CIL Regulations changes is slow by Covid-19 standards – requiring approval of both houses of Parliament. As such, collecting authorities are now encouraged to:

  • consider instalment policies that push the liability for unimplemented schemes (and phases) back en masse;
  • generally take a(s) relaxed approach (as their infrastructure funding commitments allow).

Qualifying

Applicants must be:

  • SMEs – with a turnover cap of less than £45million (calculated on a similar group+ basis to SME tax reliefs and coronavirus loans;
  • “experiencing financial difficulties for reasons connection to the effects of coronavirus” and “having difficulty paying a CIL amount” due between the Regulations coming into force and 31 July 2021;
  • able (and willing) to evidence that to the collecting authority’s satisfaction. The collecting authority can also request further information. 

Following the Holborn Studios case, there will be an expectation of transparency that the information used in making the decision will be listed and published.

Limitations

Aside from potential creditor interest in SME financial health, there are a few practical hurdles to contend with:

  • Deferral can only be requested where a Demand Notice (DN) has been served. There is no minimum period for this to be served. The interaction of the 14 and 40 day periods (and the fact that a DN is only served following actual or notice of intended commencement) appears to require developers to commit to CIL liability with a gamble on whether the authority ultimately grants deferral.  If it does not, the option to simply park the scheme has been lost;
  • Each instalment will have to be subject to a separate request;
  • Authorities will need to be persuaded that:
    • the public interest in delaying capital receipts outweighs the public interest in not doing so,
    • State Aid is not an issue;

That includes, in London, parallel persuasion of the Mayor.

A Modest Proposal with much to be modest about

So let no-one talk of more far reaching reforms: allowing partial reviews of Charging Schedules to allow more flexibility and resilience to changing patterns of investment; requiring partial reviews of Charging Schedules where affordable housing yield is persistently below the charging authority’s assumed benchmark; allowing more use of Works In Kind …

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn
Subscribe and stay updated
Receive our latest blog posts by email.
Stay in Touch
Roy Pinnock

About Roy Pinnock

Roy is a partner in the Planning and Public Law team, bringing his experience of working on regeneration projects within local government and as a consultant to his legal practice.

All posts Full bio

RELATED POSTS

  • Community Infrastructure Levy
  • Development
  • Viability

Commitment to infrastructure delivery through CIL

The commitment to infrastructure delivery is important. Only if there is a clear infrastructure development plan can a charging authority […]

By Roy Pinnock
  • Community Infrastructure Levy
  • Housebuilding

Self-build series Part 2: Options for retrofitting the exemption to future permissions

By Rachael Herbert
  • Coronavirus/ COVID-19
  • Planning Conditions
  • Planning Permission

Flexibility in a time of uncertainty: what have we really learnt from Finney and what could it mean now?

About Dentons

Across over 80 countries, Dentons helps you grow, protect, operate and finance your organization by providing uniquely global and deeply local legal solutions. Polycentric, purpose-driven and committed to inclusion, diversity, equity and sustainability, we focus on what matters most to you. www.dentons.com

Grow, Protect, Operate, Finance. Dentons, the law firm of the future is here. Copyright 2023 Dentons. Dentons is a global legal practice providing client services worldwide through its member firms and affiliates. Please see dentons.com for Legal notices.

Categories

Dentons logo in black and white

© 2025 Dentons

  • Legal notices
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies on this site