Re: [tax] CIQ: has any tax admin used it?

[Andy Greener <andy@gid.co.uk>]

At 1:47 am -0400 21/7/04, Andrew Webber wrote:
>Has anyone in the group used CIQ as the basis for the solution to
>an identification requirement?  The Position Paper v1.0 says this:
>
>>- Monitor the progress of CIQ.
>>- Assess if CIQ has matured enough for the efficient
>>  and effective development of tax documents.
>>- Work on proof of concept to determine usefulness
>>  of CIQ within the tax context.
>
>which implies that the appropriateness of CIQ is still to be
>determined.
>
>If no one has used it, has anyone documented their reasons for
>ruling it out?

We (UK IR) are conducting a thorough review of identification data
(including name and address) across all our services currently. CIQ
will be examined during that review, along with UK-specific standards
such as BS7666 for UK addresses.

I don't want to pre-empt the review, but I would say that the highly
structured form of names and addresses in CIQ may be overkill for
many uses - without some sort of gazetteer support at the point of
input and sophisticated address matching functionality internally it
is probably asking a bit much of most users to enter highly structured
address data and expect them to get it anything like correct or consistent.
However, there are some uses which benefit from such structure - so there
is a trade-off between usefulness and practicality.
-- 

Andy Greener                         Mob: +44 7836 331933
GID Ltd, Reading, UK                 Tel: +44 118 956 1248
andy@gid.co.uk                       Fax: +44 118 958 9005