Margaret, Lady Hodge and tax

In a long and sometimes heated session, HMRC was accused of having a “supine attitude” to international tax collection. Ms Hodge said the existence of a £35bn tax gap – the difference between the total amount owed to HMRC and the figure collected – suggested the body was “institutionally incapable”. She argued that if the tax legally avoided by international companies “such as Google, Amazon and Starbucks” were included, the tax gap would be far larger.

The tax officials repeatedly explained that HMRC could only collect what was legally due. “Our tax gap is a complete measure of what tax we’re owed under rules currently in place,” said Mr Harra.

Mr Troup added: “Our job is to collect tax [and we follow] the law as it stands.”

Quite. The Google, Amazon stuff is not tax avoidance. So it cannot be included in an estimate of tax avoidance.

Seems clear enough to me.

7 comments on “Margaret, Lady Hodge and tax

  1. All of a bit of charade really. Richard North over at http://www.eureferendum.com/ has an interesting take on it. I think he he right to see it as pantomime – Mrs Hodge showboats for the Guardian and the BBC, and the man from the Ministry lets slip a partial truth.

  2. Why don’t the meedja ask this appalling woman a few pertinent questions?

    Why did you vote to bring in this tax regime if you don’t approve of it?

    Why are you encouraging Government bodies to operate outside the law?

    What other laws that you helped to create are you in favour of being encouraged to be broken?

    Can I decide to break the law without punishment?

    Do you approve of trial by public opinion? If so, why have you threatened to sue anyone who discusses your shareholdings in Stemcor, which are desigend to avoid tax?

    Do you have any tax or accounting qualifications to help you decide on the matters on which you are pontificating or do you believe that a third in Economics is sufficient qualification? Do you know of any tax or accounting firms that would accept a third in economics as a sufficient qualification for hiring a trainee?

    Are you, in fact just a loud mothed millionaire commie bitch without a particle of brain who has climbed the greasy pole of politics by shitting on everyone else from a great hight?

    Or something like that…

  3. You couldn’t really have made this up.

    You have here the bureaucrats setting out the Rule of Law and the limitations of State power whilst the elected politician screams “show trials”.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>