Members of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) are fretting about HMRC's performance, and yesterday said that taxpayers were missing out on £16bn a year, as a result of evasion and criminal activity.
Where do they get that figure from?
Anyhoo, accuracy of figures aside, PAC said that HMRC needed to increase the number of investigations, and prosecute more wealthy tax evaders.
Fear not HMRC (which claims to be one of the most effective tax collectors in the world) has,as loyal readers know, a cunning plan.
It is allowing its experienced staff, with decades of service and knowledge, to leave whilst replacing them with unskilled individuals who will person the phones!
What could possibly go wrong?
Tax does have to be taxing.
Professional Cover Against the Threat of Costly TAX and VAT Investigations
Insurance to protect you against the cost of enquiry or dispute with HMRC is available from several sources including Solar Tax Investigation Insurance.
Ken Frost has negotiated a 10% discount on any polices that may suit your needs.
However, neither Ken Frost nor HMRCISSHITE either endorses or recommends their services.
What is Solar Tax Investigation Insurance?
Solar Tax Investigation Insurance is a tax-fee protection service that will pay up to £75,000 towards your accountant's fees in the event of an HM Revenue & Customs full enquiry or dispute.
To find out more, please use this link Solar Tax Investigation Insurance
HMRC Is Shite (www.hmrcisshite.com), also available via the domain www.hmrconline.com, is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
PAC should be asking probing questions regarding why so few prosecutions are brought, why they cost so much to bring AND why when brought 35% fail to get a guilty verdict. Where is it all going wrong, could it be that HMRC is conning the CPS into running with cases that have no chance of success purely to hide the massive costs of their flawed investigations? AND once CPS pick up and run with the case, they are blamed for the failure AND the costs.
ReplyDeletecheck it out guys
your figure of 35% should be clarified
ReplyDelete35% of cases fail BEFORE the third hearing!
Now obviously others fail to secure prosecutions after that, so I'm afraid HMRC / CPS performance is worse than quoted above.
Competent NO
Professional NO
Fit for purpose NO
Value for Taxes paid NO
The PAC could do no worse than starting at the bottom and working up - by the bottom I of course refer to the previous report on here regarding the staff survey results!
ReplyDeleteThen perhaps they cpould examine the amateurish way their LE empire has been run and led over the past years, its been going down a slope that Eddie the Eagle to have nightmares.
The HM Inspectorate of Constabulary reports undetaken upon HMRC make grim reading for those that understand their contents and implications. Policies that have picked the low hanging fruit, employed new entrants with finacial qualifications but an inability to withstand the rigours of criminal investigation and bail out to basic audit work or the private sector, specialist teams such as regional debriefing and humint disbanded and their work partially absorbed into case development teams developing cases that no-one wants or worse, fail to adhere to Criminal Justice standards - at great cost.
Policies decided upon by clowns from the public sector placed in positions of influence.
Lack of experienced manpower - you bety, most have left in disgust or taken the early retirement pill - could you blame them?
Get in there and fling the skel;etons out of the cupboards.
Either get HMRC back on track or leave it dealing with civil cases only.
What has happened since this monstrosity was created is now bordering on farce, and that insults The Ealing Comedy or old.
Needs a fully open and honest inquiry with power to demand access and create badly needed change, the sooner the better - or swallow the poison and get rid of it - things cannot remain the same let alone get worse.
Can they?
Mr Angry of Surbiton ;)
Vehicle Seizure & Recovery
ReplyDeleteJanuary 2015
A Dutch haulier delivering into the UK had their truck and trailer seized.HMRC and Borders Agency agreed that the haulier was completely innocent of any wrong doing but nevertheless refused to restore the vehicle. lawyer recovered the vehicle and the client’s legal costs. HMRC appealed, court dismissed the appeal and ordered that HMRC pay the legal costs. The court ruled that to retain the vehicle beyond the period required for a full investigation was disproportionate and in breach of haulage companies right to the enjoyment of their property under the European Convention on Human Rights.
HMRC don't seem able to learn by past mistakes!
Watch this space next lesson to follow
HMRC don't know the law, don't realise that European convention rights trump U.K. law and disregard past errors.
ReplyDeleteHMRC fail to review the legality and proportionality of their actions then act surprised and hard done by when courts point out their errors and throw cases out.
For the last 10 Quarters, 2.5 years HMRC / CPS has dropped / lost / failed to prosecute in over 35% of the cases.
ReplyDeletePAC were moaning last year at the pitiful performance and they'll be moaning next year.
The will is not there to actually sort this, there are too many people feeding from the trough of plenty.
Abject failings in leadership. A form of OCD applies whereby they are scared witless of failures and loss of reputation but these things happen daily. An insistence that consistency of process is more important than outcomes. The focus on staff decimation is a diversion from the primary function of tax gathering. Pandering to political masters. Diversion of vast resources to propoganda production .
ReplyDeleteTO Edward Troup, executive chair of HMRC
ReplyDeleteI feel in a generous mood tonight so fair warning is extended to you.
You have until the start of August to find, investigate, prove as flawed and stop the prosecution attempt that will fail, will cost HMRC very dearly (£200.000 to date)and will be publicised in all media to show just how arrogant, unprofessional and blinkered your department is.