The Board of HMRC should be reconstituted so that it is representative of a broad range of taxpayers including:
The investment community
He’d be the member for charities, civil society and also unions, no?
Oooh, no, fourth job!
HMRC has claimed that it is more accountable in recent years because of its widespread use of consultations on proposed legislation. This, however, is a charade.
It takes some expertise, and the expenditure of quite a lot of effort, to respond to many of the consultations documents that HMRC issues. Many civil society organisations, smaller business, and other organisations lack the expertise to respond appropriately to HMRC without being able to buy professional advice to ensure submissions are relevant and all too often the resources to let them buy such advice are not available to them. The consequence is that almost all consultation submissions to HMRC come from large businesses and their advisers, and are not, therefore, representative of the community as a whole, and such consultations do, therefore, fail any reasonable test of democratic process.
If HMRC is serious about consultation, and really wants to hear the informed opinion of a broad range of representative bodies in the UK, then it must be willing to provide grants to those who have shown aptitude or willingness to make submission to such processes, with some prior vetting to ensure that resources are allocated appropriately being necessary. Only in this way can representative democracy with regard to taxation be guaranteed.
HMRC should pay Ritchie to write his reports.