Friday, 18 September 2026

HMRC’s Four Day Week Bonanza



Nearly one in ten of HMRC’s most senior staff have stopped turning up on Fridays, as the taxman’s four-day week perk has exploded while taxpayers continue to wait for answers.

Figures released to Guido’s FOI Unit show that, as of 31 July this year, 9.1% of Grade 6 officials and 9.0% of Senior Civil Servants at HMRC were working compressed hours over a four-day week.

And the perk is growing fast.

In June 2024, 1,542 full-time HMRC staff were on a compressed four-day week. By July this year, that had risen to 2,267, a 47% increase in just two years.

Among the senior ranks, the growth is even more striking. The number of Grade 6 officials on compressed hours jumped 64%, while Grade 7 numbers rose 55%. The Senior Civil Service figure increased by 37.5%.

This is overwhelmingly a management phenomenon. The numbers at the bottom of the organisation have barely shifted: Assistant Officers and Administrative Assistants on four-day compressed hours remain at around 1%.

So while the junior staff keep the machinery running, an ever-growing slice of the management ranks are squeezing the working week into four days.

The obvious question is whether taxpayers are getting an equivalent service in return.

A Cabinet Office source told Guido: “It’s often the case that staff working on compressed hours do less work overall because of the way their weekday structure changes.”

HMRC insists that isn't happening, claiming employees on compressed hours “receive no reduction in expected workload, performance standards or accountability”.

There is, however, a rather awkward problem with that assurance: HMRC cannot produce the evidence to demonstrate that the arrangement has no effect on productivity or service delivery.

Asked for any internal review of the impact on productivity, output or customer service, HMRC confirmed that it “does not hold a central assessment, review or monitoring report”.

In other words, the taxman is expanding a working arrangement across thousands of staff, including a significant and growing proportion of its senior officials, without centrally monitoring whether it actually works.

Worse still, HMRC cannot even say how many applications for compressed hours it rejects, because there is no central record of applications.

That makes it rather difficult for taxpayers to know whether this is a carefully managed workforce policy or simply another benefit being handed out with remarkably little scrutiny.

And the backdrop is hardly one of flawless performance.

HMRC's own 2024/25 accounts show that just 76.9% of customer correspondence was dealt with within 15 working days, below its own 80% service standard. At the end of March 2025, 2.29 million items of correspondence were still on hand. HMRC also managed to answer only 71.5% of callers seeking an adviser, against an 85% target.

Yet at the same time as taxpayers were waiting for the taxman to answer their correspondence, HMRC was expanding a system under which staff can work their hours across four days instead of five.

The internal guidance says employees on compressed hours work 9 hours and 15 minutes across four days, rather than 7.4 hours across five. Arrangements can last for up to five years before staff have to reapply.

Temporary arrangements can be approved by a line manager without formal HMRC involvement, while the policy itself acknowledges that such arrangements can cover periods when “not all duties of your role are fulfilled”.

And then there is the rather generous interaction with home working.

Compressed hours sit alongside HMRC's two-days-a-week home-working arrangements, meaning a Grade 6 employee could potentially be physically in an HMRC office for just two days a week — while enjoying a three-day weekend.

Bank holidays are handled with a distinctly relaxed approach too: staff are told that their entitlement is not calculated automatically and that they must “keep a manual record”.

HMRC's wider policy document says it “believe[s] that flexible working can promote work-life balance and improve wellbeing and performance”.

That may be true for employees.

But for the taxpayer, the more important question is whether flexibility for HMRC staff is being matched by flexibility, speed and competence for the people who actually fund the organisation.

HMRC's own figures suggest there is still plenty of room for improvement. The department says customer service is getting better, but its correspondence performance remains below target, with millions of pieces of correspondence still being handled and hundreds of thousands missing the 15 day standard.

Before HMRC congratulates itself on the wonders of flexible working, perhaps it should first demonstrate that the taxpayer isn't the one paying for it!

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"

32 comments:

  1. Lazy fucking leeches.
    Sack the lot of 'em!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Working 40 hours over 4 days rather than 5 isn't necessarily a sign of laziness or being a leech.
      But sadly you don't have the IQ to grasp that.
      PS - you forgot to call them scumbags, you're slipping
      .

      Delete
    2. They should be in the office 5 days a week - that's what we pay them for, Einstein

      Delete
    3. No it's not.
      We pay them for working 40 hours a week as and when their management dictate, Hawking.

      Delete
  2. 4 days a week, compressed hours. I'd say 1, possibly more, will be Working From Home. Throw in the odd visit the regional office visit to Raleigh the Troops and you might get an overnighter..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An overnighter? Is it like the infamous HMRC Christmas 'parties'?? 😉 😜

      Delete
  3. I worry about the mental health of some HMRC employees, just look at these comments... 🙄

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What comments?

      Delete
    2. The above. And on other recent threads. Was it you, are you one of the poorly ones? Are you okay? Seriously, are you okay?

      Delete
    3. I'm absolutely fine but thanks for asking.
      Anyway, which of the above? Or all of them?
      You seem to be extremely stressed. Sit down and have a nice cup of tea.

      Delete
    4. Exposing The Corrupt21 September 2026 at 16:42

      @10:08 If you knew what we know, then you would know why!!
      HMRC has a violent bullying culture by all accounts!!!

      Delete
    5. Are you the guy who used to 'enjoy' the HMRC Xmas parties? If you know, you know 🤭 😂 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂🫣😉

      Delete
    6. @09:43 I've heard all about this before; believe its why he left the department ultimately?

      Delete
  4. I am a long-time reader of this blog who believes that it does a very useful, arguably important, job. As such I'm quite depressed by the attempted pile-on by 21 September @ 16:42 and 22 September @ 09:43 and @13:31.
    It's bad enough resorting to schoolboy level innuendo and tittle-tattle at any level, but in a conversation over whether 40 hours work (well, 37 actually) can be done equally well over 4 days as 5 is simply bizarre. Still, I suppose it would be a boring world if we were all sane.

    As for @16:42 I would ask what it is that he knows. But as he never responds to a question, literally never, what's the point.

    As for the other two, these vague allegations go back to at least 2019, possibly earlier. Is there any reason why you can't be more specific? What about names? If you're scared of that (why?) then what about office location, what actually happened and what were the consequences. After all, if you're telling the truth then you've nothing to worry about.

    I won't hold my breath.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Come on, you must know about the parties mate 😉 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

      Delete
    2. Exposing The Corrupt23 September 2026 at 14:17

      If you have any information about HMRC Christmas parties - you state allegations were made in 2019 - please can you share it with us all please? You're being very vague yourself.

      Delete
    3. Unbelievably weak replies.
      @12:28 - no, I don't know anything about "the parties". Strange that you can't give any details at all. It's almost as if it never happened.
      @14:17 - allegations of sexual assault were first made on a thread entitled "A victim of HMRC bullying writes" dated 15 February 2019. The Xmas party rubbish followed on other threads - you can look it up for yourself. An accusation of vagueness coming from yourself is hilarious. Want to tell us what you "know". Or any corruption that you've exposed. Didn't think so.
      You've both just embarrassed yourselves.

      Delete
    4. Exposing The Corrupt23 September 2026 at 16:28

      We'll never feel embarrassed or be apologetic for the fact that we have exposed wrongdoing in HMRC and campaign for genuine accountability.
      Were YOU at the party!? 🤔

      Delete
    5. Was I at WHICH effing party!!!!!!
      Which party in which year at what office where what happened?
      And, I will ask you again, which wrongdoing have you exposed?

      Delete
    6. @16:28 I presume your question is directed to 15:37. Does it matter if I was at the party?

      Delete
    7. @08:56. I guess it does matter as otherwise you are relying on second-hand gossip.
      Can you specify where and when "the party" was? And what happened?

      Delete
    8. Exposing The Corrupt24 September 2026 at 12:49

      @18:00 Yes, we heard there were several parties before it got dealt with.

      Delete
    9. @12:49. You're continuing to deflect. Which parties in which location? What have you heard about? What got dealt with?
      These are really simple questions.
      No need to be coy.

      Delete
    10. Was it a case of he was getting busy with his hands in regard to the ladies and gentlemen who had the misfortune of being his colleague?
      Scandal at the tax office!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    11. @14:03. We don't know because none of the 'accusers' will tell us.
      Nor will they tell us where or when something happened. Or what the consequences were.

      Delete
    12. Exposing The Corrupt25 September 2026 at 07:56

      Let's just say the individual concerned was lucky to have only be given their P45...

      Delete
    13. @7.56 I understand you probably can't/won't name the offenders for legal reasons but could you let us know which HMRC office they worked at? Were his victims offered support?

      Delete
    14. @07:56.
      Why was he lucky? What happened and where?
      22 September @13:31 suggests "he" may have left the department voluntarily.
      You've really no idea what, if anything, happened, have you?
      You're just making it up as you go along. Same as all that corruption that you've exposed.

      Delete
    15. Concerned Taxpayer26 September 2026 at 10:48

      Very concerned to read about this type of offending within the tax office. As an accountant, it doesn't surprise me. I do wish they would address their governance issues - here we appear to have a criminal being sacked but escaping justice. Unless I'm missing something? Quite simply disgraceful, shameful behaviour from our public servants. This site does a fantastic job of taking us inside the reality of life at HMRC.

      Delete
    16. @10:48.
      You do indeed appear to be missing something.
      None of the posters on here are able to tell us what happened, where, when, or who to.
      Does this not strike you as being a bit peculiar.

      Delete
    17. 26 September @10:48.
      What is it about your experience as an accountant that makes you unsurprised about allegations of sexual assault within HMRC?
      I'd love to know.

      Delete
  5. Please can someone tell us what happened at these parties? Lots of innuendo. Not clear whether it was something genuinely funny, or something horrifyingly serious like sexual offences?

    ReplyDelete