Ritchie’s been moonlighting I see

He does keep his professional licence up to date for a few clients:

It’s Budget week so Jeremy Corbyn has published a summary of his tax return to put pressure on Theresa May and Philip Hammond. What could go wrong? Well, it appears £40,000 in earnings from his role as Leader of the Opposition are missing from his 2015/16 declaration. Corbyn declared £114,342 in earnings from his MP’s salary, outside earnings and pension. Yet the £40,000 he should have earned as Labour leader during the financial year does not appear on his return.

Hoo, boy, it gets better:

A spokeswoman said the Cabinet Office does not comment on salary payments, while a Labour spokesman could not explain the missing money but told The Telegraph that Mr Corbyn’s P60 form, which details income for the year, also declared £77,000.

They added: “The tax return was prepared by a team of accountants who were given all the relevant information.”

It’s the taxpayer who signs off on it…..

22 thoughts on “Ritchie’s been moonlighting I see”

  1. I sneeze in threes

    If the leader’s salary is performance related pay there will not be anything to declare?

  2. The figures look right. He has’t actually been the Labour leader and he’s a principled man etc.

  3. Yes, the HMRC investigation, and subsequent prosecution, in to a incorrect return from a high income earner.

    £154k in 2015? The latest figures are for 2014-15 but a bit of a guesstimate would suggest the 99th %ile starts at £111k, so he’s way above that.

    Certainly paid more than me. Probably (imnsho) earns less than me, though 🙂

  4. Update from Guido:

    UPDATE: Statement from Team Corbyn:

    “Claims in some media that Jeremy Corbyn failed to declare £40,000 of income to the taxman are untrue. The extra payment following Jeremy’s election as Labour leader of £27,192 is recorded in the tax return under the heading of ‘public office’. We are confident the total income of £114,342 in the tax return is correct, as is the income tax charge of £35,298. Nearly all the tax was paid at source.”
    As you can see above, there is no section in the tax summary released to the public titled “public office”. An MP’s salary is £75,000 plus expenses, so where is the £27,192? Corbyn says that for some reason he included it in the “pensions and state benefits” section, hence the confusion – it took his team about four hours to work it out themselves and inform the media. They will only say they are “confident” the tax return and amount of tax paid are correct…

    Even the denial doesn’t pass the laugh test, and seems rooted in the 1970s, as if Joe Schmoe who’s interested can’t just look for himself on that newfangled intartubes thingy.

    Another Twatter instarebuttal was “Apparently that income was included on Page 2”. But there was no page 2, and “total income received” must mean something else in leftoworld.

  5. If you work out the tax payable on a gross income of £114k its about £35k, which is what he’s stated he’s paid. Hopwever if one adds on the £37k he was due as Leader, his taxable income would be £151k and the tax due on that is about £50k. So either he hasn’t paid tax at all on the Leaders salary, or his tax return is wrong, or both, as even if he had 40% tax removed at source on the Leaders salary, his marginal tax rate between 100 and 121k is 50% (due to the withdrawal of the personal allowance, and an extra £700 would be due for the 7k of income between 114 and 121k.

    How is that not tax evasion?

  6. He’s now saying that the pension listed as ‘Public Office’ is in fact his Leaders salary. Which he’s listed as £27k gross. Yet he became leader on 15th Sept 2015, which means over 6 months of the salary applies. The Leader gets 139k, which includes his MP salary of 75k, meaning the extra salary is worth 64k/yr. Lets be generous and say that he didn’t draw a salary til 1st Oct, so 6 months of 64k is £32k, not £27k. Where’s the difference gone?Are they saying having been made leader on 15th Sept it took him to 1st Nov to get around to drawing his new salary?

  7. The article in the Tel is a bloody disgrace. It keeps saying that he’s paid as “Labour leader” when in fact he’s paid as Leader of the Opposition. If I want to read a lot of shite I’ll read the Guardian; the Tel has to do better than that. I shall return to my attempts to persuade my wife that we should give the bloody thing up.

  8. The Meissen Bison

    Didn’t Jeremy Corbyn have to pay the £100 fine last time for late filing? Is there no aspect of life at which he is not completely hopeless?

  9. The P60 point is of course a bit of a red herring, as you get a separate P60 for each employment.

    This looks like exactly the sort of thing we get all the time from HMRC: “You have reported £X of income on which £Y has been deducted. The figures we have suggest £A of income with £B of tax deducted. If we are correct you have underpaid by £Z. There may be a simple explanation: please check your records and let us know the position”.

    It is almost invariably either a previous return for a new client that we’ve just taken on (phew!) or else a client with multiple employments and a carefree attitude to record-keeping.

    Speculation: did the accountants just see a P60 from Parliament, tick off the “we have a copy of the client’s P60” item on the checklist, and not bother looking for any others? Very simple trap to fall into, but not really excusable if you’re aware that the client has taken on a new job.

    HMRC would normally, of course, take the view that the taxpayer ought to check the return, and if he does not do so he has been careless. Not that many people do; I can see their point, but it smacks a bit of expecting me to check that the boiler engineer has done all the servicing correctly before I sign off the job sheet.

    It’s not clear whether this would count as a prompted or an unprompted disclosure to HMRC: “prompted” is defined as a disclosure where you’re pretty sure HMRC will be looking at your return, so it seems prompted.

    So if it’s careless and prompted, that looks like a penalty in the range of 15-30% of the potential lost revenue – and something of a PI issue for the accountants.

  10. The Conservatives should be paying Corbyn’s additional salary, and as the government they should ensure that the right tax is paid.

    He who gets the benefit should pay the price.

  11. abacab,

    > it took his team about four hours to work it out

    If it takes an entire team four hours to correct one pensioner’s tax return, what hope do the rest of us have?

  12. Bloke in North Dorset

    “HMRC would normally, of course, take the view that the taxpayer ought to check the return, and if he does not do so he has been careless. Not that many people do; I can see their point, but it smacks a bit of expecting me to check that the boiler engineer has done all the servicing correctly before I sign off the job sheet.”

    I did mine and my wife’s this year and used last years as a guide, especially for my self employed wifes’ return. I found something that I thought could be claimed, rang them up to check (very helpful they were) and I was correct. Only saved a few quid but I don’t expect to have to check up on my accountant.

  13. The difference pointed out by Jim could well be employers NI contributions; which form part of the cost of “employment” but does not form part of salary, and therefore does not appear on tax returns.

  14. Edward,

    No, the numbers don’t work out. Regardless of whether you treat Leader of HM Loyal Opposition as a separate employment (so with a separate NI Secondary Threshold) or as a separate payment as part of his employment as an MP (I’ve no idea which of these applies).

  15. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/self-assessment-parliament-sa102mp

    Separate tax return pages are required for MP and ministerial salaries. So Leader of the Opposition earnings probably are separately reported. If also pensionable and contributions taken from gross pay before operation of PAYE then figure on the tax return would only be the net amount.

    I’ve had clients with foreign investment income which has been described as “pensions” in the HMRC summary. (The same box covered both types of income.) Something similar may have happened here.

    Of course, we have not actually seen the Tax Return which would show us exactly which boxes have been completed; what expenses claimed; what reliefs have been claimed against capital disposals to reduce gains to nil, etc. We’re only being let in on the final computation which does not reveal any of the tax planning which got us to those figures.

  16. Bloke in North Dorset

    I’m not sure how it affects the numbers but as Corbyn is 67 he doesn’t pay NI.

  17. Who gives a shit? Polly always refuses to publish her tax return although she thinks it is key to democracy.

    Why pander to the beliefs of morons? I could not care less if someone wanted to pay Corbyn £584, 000,000. I just need to know where to apply

  18. And the same goes for the the heads of NHS trusts etc. How much would you want to be in that position, subject to the court of public opinion? I would want at least £1,000,000 per annum plus severance pay.

Leave a Reply

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