Skip to content

Ritchie and the Tax Journal

You might recall that the Tax Journal had a little survey on who agreed with Murph over the tax gap etc. The results are in:

The UK should not have a general anti-avoidance rule, according to two thirds of respondents to a Tax Journal online survey. More than 300 of the 400 respondents did not agree that legal tax avoidance should be regarded as part of the ‘tax gap’.

Six out of ten said they believed that the government is doing enough to tackle avoidance, and a similar proportion considered that HMRC should not be given further resources, in addition to those already announced, to tackle the tax gap. Half of the respondents said the avoidance scheme disclosure rules had been effective in reducing avoidance.

He has criticised the widely-quoted estimates produced by Richard Murphy and claimed that Murphy’s methodology was ‘deeply and systematically flawed’.

Readers were asked whose was the better estimate of the tax gap. While 166 favoured HMRC’s estimate of £42 billion and 83 favoured Murphy’s estimate of £120 billion, a further 151 readers said that both were ‘wrong’.

8 thoughts on “Ritchie and the Tax Journal”

  1. The survey must have been hijacked.

    That’s what the right wing do.

    That’s why they are dangerous to democracy.

    I’m right.

    You are all wrong.

    Blah blah blah.

    /Ritchie mode off

  2. Surreptitious Evil

    I don’t think that you have to be “right wing” to be a reader of the Tax Journal who disagrees with pretty much everything Ritchie says.

  3. I suspect a goodly proportion of the respondents and indeed of ritchie’s long suffering readership go there out of curiosity from worstall’s site. That it certainly the case with me.

  4. Yes, I wondered t’other week about the top ten economics blogs whether Murphy’s would be placed so high if Tim didn’t link to him (for an experiment, perhaps Murphy’s content could be mirrored and Tim linked to that).

  5. Surreptitious Evil

    Ah, right. I failed then by having Weetabix rather than “long pig” this morning. So much to learn …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *