@RichardJMurphy and logic: The twain do not meet

Lawyers Pinsent Masons said the number of serious tax evasion cases – with more than £50,000 of suspected tax evasion – had fallen by a quarter in the past year. Meanwhile the number of raids undertaken in the 2011-12 tax year has risen to 499 from 196 in the 2010-11 tax year.

This is taken by Ritchie to show that clearly, HMRC do not have enough resources.

Yup, that they have more people to conduct more raids shows that they don\’t have enough people.

 

 

22 thoughts on “@RichardJMurphy and logic: The twain do not meet”

  1. Don’t be silly Mr B.
    This movie fades out with 130,000 tax inspectors clustered around a fish & chip shop in Tiverton over a VAT discrepancy of £7.15. The final frame is the Police Armed Response Unit crashing through he door, guns blazing.

  2. And the rest of the Guardian quote, Timsy?

    Cases being pursued fell, even though there were more raids. Therefore less HMRC resources, less pursuits.

    You twat.

  3. Nah

    The discrepancy couldn’t have been £7.15p. Armed response is only authorised when the £10.00p threshold is broken.

  4. “has risen to 499 from 196”: I wonder why they have written that in the arse-about-face American way. We’d say “has risen from 196 to 499” wouldn’t we?

  5. “..the number of serious tax evasion cases – with more than £50,000 of suspected tax evasion – had fallen by a quarter in the past year.”

    Is the likely explanation that people in a position to evade taxes are earning less money? There’s nothing like a recession to drive down tax evasion.

  6. Darn! I’d better move on. I’m a non-dom tax avoiding specialist corporation with headquarters in the Gloggo Islands, and I live here in stunning London 89.99 days of the year. But last week, my plane out was delayed by five minutes and left at 00.05 of the 91st day. My lawyer says it won’t be long before HMRC will be along and sequester my Ferrari and other goodies. So, bye, bye all – I’m off to Geneva.

  7. “Cases being pursued fell, even though there were more raids. Therefore less HMRC resources, less pursuits.”

    That’s a bizarre over-reach, you twat.

    In the Real World, where qualified, trained tax auditors exist, the decision to pursue further investigation is based on the information gathered and a specific set of criteria to evaluate said information as to whether further investigation/pursuit is warranted. If the criteria shows further investigation isn’t warranted, then the pursuit is dropped.

    It has everything to do with proper management of existing resourses and nothing to do with lack thereof.

    But then you wouldn’t know anything about that, now would you Arnald? Given that you have no education, training, experience or credentials in field…

  8. Peasant, you twat, doing the raids from a list of addresses is the easy part. Having enough qualified, trained tax auditors are the ones who have to evaluate the pursuit.

    If there aren’t enough of them, nothing happens. The time taken to build the cases means that less staff get less done. So they concentrate on the less sophisticated cases to keep the numbers ticking over. If you had a fucking clue instead of thinking I don’t then you’d know that.

    Or is the sacking of thousands HMRC staff a measure of the fact they were just sitting there all day doing nothing?

    It’s like the ‘bobbies on the beat’ fallacy. Yep we can chuck the coppers on the street, but the who the hell is doing the detective work that actually catches anyone?

  9. Arnald, you twat:

    Once again, your ignorance of how grown-ups work is showing…

    HMRC wouldn’t bother with the time, expense and possible danger to personnel of raiding suspected tax evaders if they knew, up front, that they wouldn’t have the resources to review what they’ve seized and then prosecute accordingly.

    If you did anything other than say “Want fries with that?” eight hours a day, you’d understand that.

  10. Arnald stop calling people names – it puts you in a very bad light.Perhaps you don’t know how to communicate civily. Twatface. There, how does that make you feel? Seek professional help.

    If cases have fallen by a quarter, doesn’t that mean there are still three quarters left to go for? At some point the marginal return will fall below the cost of inspection but the fact one is up and the other down does not of itself indicate that the investment in more inspectors isn’t still yeilding a positive return.

  11. The numbers suggest that some of these raids are being made when the amount of tax evaded is less than £50k. The increase in the number of HMRC staff being put onto checking specific categories of people suspected of tax evasion under the current government has led to improved efficiency (a few staff actually know what they are doing) with significantly increased collection of taxes (try reading the FT and you’ll see periodic reports of higher collections) and the break-even point for checking has dropped well below £50k of tax evaded.

  12. I thought that HMRC had gone on a recruitment drive. However, given their internal processes, this will not mean much. As a real-life example, they have just agreed a settlement with me, after 9 months, of a case at the exact amount I offered 9 months ago. In other words 9 months of complying with internal procedures and codes and endless questions – largely I suspect put in place because of all the lefty campaigners bitching about HMRC settlements re Vodafone etc – in order to reach the conclusion that the amount I originally offered in settlement is fair. That is not an efficient use of resources, in my judgment.

  13. Diogenes, I have no idea of the facts of your case, but look at it from the other point of view. The Revenue didn’t know if you were honest. They investigated. Turned out you were (or not worth having a scrap about- nothing personal, I don’t know the facts). Are you seriously saying that the Revenue should just take at face value what every cab driver/builder/Russian oligarch says? If they’d just accepted what you said, would you have any incentive to be honest next time?

  14. My sister, a barrister, has just undergone a year-long tax investigation which began with them making very serious allegations against her and has ended with them sending her a cheque for £40 to repay an overpayment.

  15. Morning everyone

    Of course all tax collectors are necessary and this nasty coalition government has reduced the ability of the Courageous State to extort money from everyone’s pocket. That’s why, when Labour comes to power, every other person will be employed collecting tax. We’ll also clamp down and use what remains of our armed forces to invade places like Switzerland and clamp down on people who are committing the crime of wanting to keep their own money. I seem to have run out of my medication so forgive me if this seems rambling.

  16. The Revenue have ballsed themselves up by getting rid of large numbers of experienced staff and introducing moronic centralisation schemes that have been utterly useless and wasted the time of those left. That’s why the numbers of those harrassed by HMRC are falling. HMRC managers are useless socialistic shite. However much more cash/resources cretins like Murphy/Arnald would give them HMRC will always be useless socialistic shite and they will always balls it up.

    Good–serves them right.

    Good–serves the useless bastards right.

  17. O/T but kind of relevant to john problem’s remark at nº8-

    I remember an old crime story where the motive was the need to destroy a press photograph that had chanced to show, in the background, a man who was supposedly spending a year abroad for tax purposes. If the photo were discovered he would be liable for a huge amout of back tax.

    At which point, the name of Hotblack Desiato springs to mind…

  18. 15 – Luke

    We presented a sample of the evidence and offered HMRC the chance to do a detailed investigation. They went through their checklist and did not even check our numbers or ask for more evidence. It took 9 months. This is massive inefficincy. I would rather, when they ask for voluntary disclosures, that they take the evidence on trust and process the cases expeditiously. We declared the tax under an “amnesty” and they footttled for 9 months. That is inefficiency, isnt it?

Leave a Reply

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