Gi’ssa job!

That is the view of Tax Research UK director Richard Murphy, who says a thorough review of the governance of HMRC is required and that it is “absurd” that HMRC’s board is made up of representatives from the large business community and its advisers “who between them represent about 700 tax payers when there are 31m income tax payers in the UK.” He continues: “It is also absurd that parliament has almost no resources available to it to scrutinise HMRC. Margaret Hodge may have done well, but it was despite the NAO and not because of it – indeed, the NAO fought long and hard to deny information on HMRC to the PAC. That is wholly unacceptable and must change, which is why I suggest there should be an Office for Tax Responsibility reporting straight to the PAC that can properly audit HMRC and tax policy.”

Murphy adds that any review should look at the resourcing of HMRC and should have representation from beyond big business and the tax profession. If government cannot be persuaded to implement a review, employers’ groups, professional bodies and trade unions should work together, he says.

He accepts that funding would be an issue, but says a relatively limited number of people producing a report on a timely basis could have a significant impact on taxation in the UK during the next 10 to 20 years.

27 thoughts on “Gi’ssa job!”

  1. “employers’ groups, professional bodies and trade unions should work together, he says.”

    None of those would ‘represent’ me and all of them, if they managed to ‘work together’ at all, would connive to screw us for their benefit. It’s as if the 1970s never happened.

  2. He’s back to tax now, is he? I thought that focus on reflating the economy would soon revert to taking money out of it. He’s just swivelling in his stump.

  3. There was a time when one had to make the effort to go to Speakers’ Corner to laugh at idiots like Murphy. What a boon the internet is.

  4. diogenes

    Well with the Fair Tax Mark being in the news to such a great degree he obviously needs another string to his bow.

    His posts on PQE have been hilarious – as well as his inability to answer (or even allow) a single substantive response – there seems to be some new cheerleader – ‘Marco Fante’ – I presumed someone this sycophantic had to be a troll but can’t find any evidence to support someone of that name in the Mussolini regime?

    Theo

    That example is classic – and sends a shiver down the spine – the man needs sectioning for his sake as well as that of the wider community and country – him getting the degree of influence of Widmerpool doesn’t bear thinking about. I don’t normally wish ill on anyone but given his health problems….

  5. Bloke in Northern Germany

    And where is Murphy’s chief ass licker Ivan Horrocks these days? Maybe he doesn’t like PQE?

  6. BiNG

    He has complained from recollection that he is over 70 and a victim of neoliberalism – it’s possibly he has finally departed this mortal coil – in some ways I will be sad to see him go – it’s rare to see an unreconstructed apologist for mass murder in the public arena – his honesty was in that sense refreshing, if appalling…..

  7. “There was a time when one had to make the effort to go to Speakers’ Corner to laugh at idiots like Murphy. What a boon the internet is.”

    But then the internet grants every idiot a platform without the effort of getting on a soapbox. And, unfortunately, there is no point of view so stupid that some people will not adopt it.

  8. What do trade unions bring to the table?
    What do professional bodies bring to the table? I’ve been a member of two – they are nothing to do with tax.
    Employers groups? Which ones? IoD? CBI? Russel Group?

  9. So, a small number of people who represent vested interests should be replaced by a small number of people who include TBD.

    Subtle as a fart in a lift, as ever.

    Looked back on some of his posts, just to cure the mental itch of his position on the inflationary aspects of PQE (aka, when trying to board a bandwagon now passed and forgotten, GQE) [Jezza appears not to give a FFAARD about Greens, does he?]

    It’s;

    -definitely not inflationary
    -you are banned for suggesting it’s inflationary
    -it is inflationary but we can just turn it off 2 years before it proves to be inflationary
    -it’s not inflationary
    -it is inflationary
    -it is not inflationary

    Glad we cleared that up then.

  10. Trade unions could contribute some useful stuff on how the operation of PAYE and expenses/benefits rules work from an employee’s point of view, though to be honest I suspect tax advisors would be better placed.

    Professional bodies involved in tax, like ATT, CIOT, ICAEW, and so on can bring a lot of useful technical expertise, or at least co-ordinate the bringing of it.

    Employers’ groups would balance the concerns of unions, though again I suspect that the advisors of employers are better placed to do it.

    Declaration of interest: I am of course a tax advisor, the representative of advisors, and a member of CIOT 🙂

  11. It does occur to me that the main danger of inflation is the anticipation of inflation.

    What will happen to wage demands when people start to believe that “banks create money out of thin air”?

    When huge construction projects begin and hod carriers become millionaires?

    When Arab princes eye nervously the hordes of Irish brickies advancing on Hampstead? (Actually, that may be the one that bursts the housing bubble. In which case the mob will lynch Jezza.)

  12. Pellinor, please take this in the right spirit, but you’d be advised to spell it adviser, unless of course you are from the American speaking countries, in which case I hope you’ll forgive me being a crusty old fogey.

  13. “Jezza appears not to give a FFAARD about Greens, does he?]”

    To the point that reopening coal mines in the UK is a policy he will be pursuing. will he also mandate huge flared collars and enormous sideburns, to get that true 1970s flavour?

  14. John Miller – I take it in the right spirit: but I like the word spelt “Advisor”, so that’s how I spell it (-:

    “Adviser” just looks wrong to me – flat and dull and artificial, somehow. It’s a cheap plastic word.

    And I forgive anyone being a crusty old fogey (even if they cast aspersions of Americanism on me!) – the way I’m going, not to would be terribly hypocritical…

  15. How about investing in Concorde and the Adcanced Gas-Cooled Reactor? They should bring the UK dividends for the foreseeable future. Opening up all the coal mines that Harold Wilson closed is another fantastic idea.

  16. Pellinor – what really pains me is it took me 4 years of my principal putting thick red lines through my spelling of “advisor” before I changed…

    Thanks for your reply which made me chuckle 😉

  17. Hey, how about having 650 MPs involved? They represent 31m taxpayers apparently…
    Rather better represent the people than trade unions. Who by definition can at best represent their members. And maybe just represent their own political agenda.

Leave a Reply

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