tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post3627937814845692181..comments2024-03-28T23:56:22.210+00:00Comments on HMRC Is Shite: An Inspector Calls II - Clasper SpeaksKen Frosthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13568488818950912374noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-54341642480965128512011-10-26T11:46:42.872+01:002011-10-26T11:46:42.872+01:00So, how to overcome this? The easiest answer would...So, how to overcome this? The easiest answer would be to increase the liability of agents/employers/individuals/HMRC when they make avoidable mistakes. However this will result on more court cases being heard around matters of tax and no one wants that.<br />Another suggestion would be for HMRC to admit when it has made a mistake and accept the responsibility, however as a countermeasure, this would mean HMRC being able to disclose when it hasn’t made a mistake and a rogue agent has used legal privileges around confidentiality to displace blame.<br /><br />In any case it requires a huge culture shift, but this would involve closing down several business who exist to make a fast buck from others ignorance and they will probably lobby heavily.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-22556364227150074292011-10-26T11:46:01.797+01:002011-10-26T11:46:01.797+01:00Groups 4 and 5 (and to a limited extent 2) general...Groups 4 and 5 (and to a limited extent 2) generally do not have their reputations hurt if they get their calculations wrong, for the reasons above. They can just blame HMRC and rely on the ignorance of those who are ‘employed’ by them to blame HMRC, whereas HMRC staff are limited by what they can say with regards to errors caused by an individual/their representative or employer/their representative because if HMRC hurts the reputation of an agent it (or rather the staff member) can be sued. Groups 4 & 5 tend to hide behind that.<br /><br />Groups 1 & 3 have a lot to lose here, if they haven’t interpreted legislation correctly and courts/parliament issue something that affect their businesses they may lose their entire business.<br /><br />Groups 2, 4 and 5 may have some initial hurt to their reputation but can simply open up again under a different name due to their size.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-25149134698000937942011-10-26T11:44:07.750+01:002011-10-26T11:44:07.750+01:00Unfortunately, HMRC has to be seen to deal with al...Unfortunately, HMRC has to be seen to deal with all such groups of agents in the same way, regardless of their professional qualifications in tax or otherwise. I can only assume that this because under some kind of common law, if someone assigns someone else as a representative then a government department cannot discriminate against that representative.<br /><br />So in the ICAEW speech Mike Clasper is delivering reassurances to the first group (with some in the second group). This is fine, but he forgets that HMRC staff who deal with groups 2-5 will remain sceptical. This is why:<br /><br />Groups, 2, 4 & 5 have their own understanding of how tax/PAYE should operate. They will often remain in day-to-day communication (often at odds) with HMRC staff members because they will have often made administrative mistakes and tried to put the focus on HMRC/computer payroll systems that HMRC have not developed).<br /><br />Groups 4 & 5 can limit their legal responsibility (as much as HMRC can) due to the fact that although they represent the taxpayer in some manner, they are not dealing with that persons affairs overall. Group 4 only acts for the employer and their functions are limited to those of making correct deductions on behalf of an employee either through information the employee provides them, through direct deductions of tax (agreed by dispensation) or from the PAYE code sent to them (and operated within PAYE guidance) and Group 5 can simply say “well, the agreement between me and the taxpayer only extends to taking a percentage of their repayment but I will not be held liable for any underpayments”) and HMRC can limit their responsibility by stating that they were only acting on the instructions of the appointed representative in lieu of the person whose legal responsibility to provide such information did not provide such information (as the agent/person contract is a private contract – not something a government department is also bound by).<br /><br />So, now that’s been dealt with, there is the reputation of the businesses concerned.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-65837799256301029402011-10-26T11:15:52.572+01:002011-10-26T11:15:52.572+01:00It's difficult to descramble the spin in this ...It's difficult to descramble the spin in this speech.<br /><br />It appears to be to try and appease agents concerns. The introduction of tax professionals seems to be a step in the right direction, in other words there will be other staff other than inspectors who have some knowledge of how best to interpret tax legislation and HMRC's own manuals and whatnot.<br /><br />From my experience in working in HMRC in a PAYE/SA environment. There are several types of tax agents:<br />1. Professionals - those who understand how tax and the department works, they generally work for a recognised firm of accountants (either one of the big firms, or from a larger pool of firms who have set up subsidiaries). Their partners or directors have achieved several accounting qualifications. It is recognised that not everyone in such firms have a wide knowledge of tax e.g. those who are employed to do repetitive/administrative tasks - much the same as such tasks that are expected to be carried out by HMRC admin grades. These will often have clients that are large business or high-profile individuals.<br /><br />2. One or two man bands - who, in order to raise their profile, may set up shop under a franchise, they often have qualifications in accountancy, but not necessarily in tax, they may or may not have staff who work for them. They will often have clients that are individuals with small businesses who would prefer someone else dealt with their self assessment/CT affairs or simple PAYE payroll functions. <br /><br />3. Umbrella agents. Those who have identified that there are still benefits to being a corporation rather than an individual when it comes to tax and employment law (sometimes have a cross-over with 2 & 4).<br /><br />4. Payroll agents - These are those who have bought some kind of software solution and charge their customers for the privilege of having someone trained to use it.<br /><br />5. Repayment agents – these are people who have identified a target audience e.g. those who are subcontractors in the construction industry, those who have yet to claim deductions such as professional subscriptions or laundry expenses or those that simply approach them to see if there is a tax refund.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-9983695790453686842011-10-25T22:16:14.638+01:002011-10-25T22:16:14.638+01:00We all know it is bullshit... how he manages to sl...We all know it is bullshit... how he manages to sleep at night show what a two-faced lying bastard he really is. I feel sorry for any children he may have fathered. And what a crock of shit the other two-faced lying bastards called Government really are. And that two-faced bastard Gordon Brown must be really proud of himself.<br />'Statistics, statistics and damn lies' ... forget the 'statistics'. Upset, upset... we just pays the bills and their wages!<br /><br />Treasury Report – "If a view of dealing with HMRC as being a frustrating, costly and time-consuming business were to become entrenched then there is a significant risk of public respect for the institution, and the tax system more generally, being lost."<br /><br />ENTRENCHED, ENTRENCHED, what planet are you on? Clearly have no idea and this has been going on for years.... at our expense and not just fnancial.<br /><br />RESPECT, now you are taking the proverbial – that was lost a very long time ago.<br /><br />Wakey, Wakey! <br />Planet Zog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-12583633805642379082011-10-25T18:49:50.042+01:002011-10-25T18:49:50.042+01:00having watched him on "hmrc the movie" t...having watched him on "hmrc the movie" the awards ceremony filmed with all the emotion of a staged love in with balloons supplied from your local irec, this spin clearly is the reason he is employed for a few days a week on the pittance that a few hundred thousands is.<br />i hope he believes this as clearly his staff and "stakeholders" arent falling for it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-40699885025430305782011-10-25T17:19:10.651+01:002011-10-25T17:19:10.651+01:00The 60% is bollocks. HMRC worked better before pac...The 60% is bollocks. HMRC worked better before pacesetter, gave the taxpayer a service and were better trained - whatever happened to training tax inspectors?. All of this 'tax professional' nonsense is a way of not having to pay for decent training or pay a decent wage at the end of said training. The only training is 'customer' (sorry Ken) based for example - how to handle telephone calls! for f***s sake! As for the 8000 staff moving to compliance is the figure not 1200 over four years? That may not be accurate but it is a bit more accurate than 8000. They have introduced new software but computers used by staff are old and outdated with hardly any memory so they keep freezing. One of the new systems allows the user to open up to four or five screens at once but the old PC's don't allow for that. HMRC is failing badly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-27983270625396327992011-10-25T16:06:08.222+01:002011-10-25T16:06:08.222+01:00@15.40
The 60% improvement IS bullshit! These tea...@15.40<br /><br />The 60% improvement IS bullshit! These teams were probably operating more efficiently before the introduction of PaceSetter. Any so-called improvement is a product of skewed stats provided by self-serving managers at all levels because PaceSetter cannot be seen to have failed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-51441271420291821792011-10-25T15:40:55.532+01:002011-10-25T15:40:55.532+01:00Heaven's forbid, it is seen as a HMRC 'ini...Heaven's forbid, it is seen as a HMRC 'initiative'... from the Treasury Committee Report<br /><br />119. We recommend that HMRC draw up minimum service standards for dealing with post in a timely and accurate fashion in consultation with the professional bodies, tax charities and businesses representatives. Such standards should recognise the distinction between simple and complex queries, and look at the progress of correspondence end-to-end rather than in relation to individual items of post. We recommend that the Department publishes an indicative timetable for achieving those standards and keeps us regularly updated on progress towards meeting them.<br /><br />Only because HMRC are being told what to do!<br /><br />AND<br /><br />"Teams have been empowered to improve their own processes through ‘Pacesetter’ methodology and already an improvement in productivity of up to 60% has been seen in some areas."<br /><br />60% improvement in productivity... WHAT THE FCKU were they doing before? Taxpayer paying the wages of teams who were only performing at 40%... <br /><br />... it just get better when you look behind the bullshit.<br /><br />Criminal.<br /><br />Somebody wants locking up!<br /><br />Rhymes with 'anchors', and has a 'W' at the beginning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-11621310383971270292011-10-25T15:38:47.702+01:002011-10-25T15:38:47.702+01:00The usual spin bollocks from Clasper, watch the wh...The usual spin bollocks from Clasper, watch the whole thing blow up in his face in the next 12 months, bet he isnt even working for HMRC then.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29600742611858461.post-15507388229654550552011-10-25T10:41:06.961+01:002011-10-25T10:41:06.961+01:00What an absolute crock of s...e!What an absolute crock of s...e!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com