when letting off Goldman Sachs from paying up to £20m in interest payments, a judge has concluded.
In a high court ruling, the judge found that the 2010 \”sweetheart\” deal brokered by the then permanent secretary for tax, Dave Hartnett, was lawful
Poor UKUncut. Not one of their allegations over tax has managed to stand up to scrutiny yet, has it?
Ta to KJ, no I hadn\’t already seen it.
The judge wasn’t impressed by HMRC’s conduct. But he ruled that it wasn’t actually unlawful.
And who was in charge of the Treasury and hence tax collection at the time ?
Trumpeting government collusion with big business makes you look like a twat.
On the subject of HMRC and “things you hadn’t alraedy seen” here’s a couple that’ll ratchet blood pressure I think 🙂
What !! ?
and
Yes – really, when are we going to bring back public pillories?
Know what else makes you look like a twat, Arnald? Bloviating and getting it wrong.
Not that that’s ever stopped you.
We shall still be cleaning up after Brown in May 2015 (and for a few years after that unless Ed Millionaireband gets a majority of seats with 30% of the vote).
The HMRC officials didn’t know every detail of the law because Brown had more than doubled the amount of detail – in his 10 years the size of Tolley’s tax guide more than doubled so no-one knew everything since there wasn’t time between budgets for a single person to learn everything before it changed again.
John 77, I don’t think there was a problem with HMRC staff not knowing the law. As I read it, both they and Goldman reckoned Goldman would probably lose if it went to trial. So Goldman eventually paid up.
Others has coughed up earlier in return for being let off the interest. Fair enough. But Goldman dragged it out for years, AND by the time they settled, HMRC didn’t have to worry so much about the case going against them, because they had settled with all the others. And HMRC seem to have messed up with Hartnett making an offer he had no authority to make.
So probably not very good negotiation, but hardly unlawful (or showing ignorance of tax law).
Yes, Luke
And very necessarily highlighted.
Worstall likes to celebrate corporate regulatory capture of democratic processes.
Snigger
Arnald, eh?
Sorry to be slow, but I’m not sure what your point is. If it’s that HMRC didn’t get the best possible deal, I think I agree (but i wasn’t there at the time). But I spend my time agreeing settlements to disputes. You don’t always get the best possible deal. It’s easy to be wise after the event.