Named and shamed - tax cheats

[V8mate]

HarryW said:

Owing 29k is one thing but having 17k 'charges' against them seems a bit steep to me. What happened to charging reasonable fees backed up by a demonstrable costs incurred to warrant it?

Don't their terms state that penalties can amount to 100% of the tax owed?

[blindswelledrat]

V8mate said:

blindswelledrat said:

Further, I have seen the phrase "tax cheats" everywhere with regards to this, and there is nothing whatsoever to suggest that it is cheats at all. The fact that there is a debt there suggests that it is more of an above board inability to pay.

We've discussed this^. The document uses the word 'deliberate' in reference to the defaulters. That suggests quite the opposite.

I missed that. 'Deliberate' is meaningless though, surely?
If someone chooses to pay thier staff rather than the Inland Revenue, then that is 'deliberate'.
Im sure you are proably correct, but I think it is daft to print these sort fo things without more detail

[V8mate]

blindswelledrat said:

V8mate said:

blindswelledrat said:

Further, I have seen the phrase "tax cheats" everywhere with regards to this, and there is nothing whatsoever to suggest that it is cheats at all. The fact that there is a debt there suggests that it is more of an above board inability to pay.

We've discussed this^. The document uses the word 'deliberate' in reference to the defaulters. That suggests quite the opposite.

I missed that. 'Deliberate' is meaningless though, surely?
If someone chooses to pay thier staff rather than the Inland Revenue, then that is 'deliberate'.
Im sure you are proably correct, but I think it is daft to print these sort fo things without more detail

I agree that the document contains too little context. And surely if someone doesn't pay their taxes - either can't pay or won't pay - the way of humiliating them is to take them to Court and then, if necessary, sending the bailiffs in.

If someone serially, for example, starts businesses, makes profits and then closes them before paying over any due taxes, the 'publicity' should be that 'Mr B. Swelledrat has eleventy billion decided court cases against him amounting to eleventy billion pounds of unpaid taxes' rather than simply publishing a table which the level of misunderstanding demonstrated in this thread proves to be flawed in its ability to communicate clearly.

[V8mate]

BTW, and for the avoidance of doubt, tax is theft.

[Eric Mc]

V8mate said:

BTW, and for the avoidance of doubt, tax is theft.

Of course it's not.

It's about time we as a nation grew up and accepted that civilised countries absolutely NEED to have a tax system in place. Of course, we can debate whether the tax collected is used correctly, efficiently and fairly - but that's a different debate.

In this case, some businesses are obviously neglecting what they are required to do by LAW. They should be named and shamed.

My problem with this PARTICULAR incident is that the soft-touch smaller businesses are being "outed" but the large multi-nationals who have the capability to sway and persuade politicians are completely ignored.

I'm not against "naming and shaming" tax evaders and tax cheats - but I would wnt the naming and shaming to include EVERYBODY who is so engaged.

Edited by Eric Mc on Friday 22 February 11:14

[V8mate]

Brilliant. You're more reliable than my electricity supply, Eric.

I was simply making a personal, political point. Deliberately, quite separate from the 'sensible' discussion relating to the OP.

[Eric Mc]

I'd prefer if people stuck to the topic under discussion. Pity there is no "Chairman" facility on these discussion forums.

[HarryW]

V8mate said:

BTW, and for the avoidance of doubt, tax is theft.

I prefer to call it extortion with menaces............

[HarryW]

V8mate said:

HarryW said:

Owing 29k is one thing but having 17k 'charges' against them seems a bit steep to me. What happened to charging reasonable fees backed up by a demonstrable costs incurred to warrant it?

Don't their terms state that penalties can amount to 100% of the tax owed?

Unfair terms and conditions, punitive charges are not normally enforceable in any other walk of life, particularly one where the contract is not mutually agreed but deemed to be accepted.

However i forgot this is HMG/HMRC, so you can make it up as you go along and change statute if necessary. We seem to have lost sight of who works for who, across the pond the 'by the people, for the people' is engrained and if we could learn one thing from there it would be that.

Before i get shouted at, i am firmly in the camp that believes there has to be some form of taxation, it however should be reasonable and fair.

[Eric Mc]

No one would argue with any of that.

For the record - here is the penalty system currently in place for those who fail to submit their Self Assessment tax returns by the due date (31 January) -

Anyone filing late has already incurred £100 late-filing penalty. After that, daily £10 fines up to £900 are also in place if the taxpayer has not paid up to three months after the deadline. Should six months elapse with no payment, an additional penalty of £300 or 5% is imposed, whichever is higher. After a year, a further £300 or 100% of tax owed is imposed.

[markh1973]

The webpage that leads to that list explains what a defaulter actually is

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/defaulters/

[JDRoest]

Eric Mc said:

V8mate said:

BTW, and for the avoidance of doubt, tax is theft.

Of course it's not.

It's about time we as a nation grew up and accepted that civilised countries absolutely NEED to have a tax system in place. Of course, we can debate whether the tax collected is used correctly, efficiently and fairly - but that's a different debate.

It's the amount of tax being paid is plain and simple theft.

Income tax+NI+Employers NI+Vat (on the remainder). And that doesn't include all the other bs you have to pay for like fuel duty.

But what is really galling is that despite this huge amount of tax they are collecting - they still spend more!

[Eric Mc]

But not the principle of taxation.

As I said - you can argue that tax is too much or that it is not spent wisely. But that's another thread.

[toppstuff]

The problem with taxation is that it depends on a covenant of trust, between the taxpayer and the elected officials who spend the tax revenues raised.

That covenant was broken long ago. People paying the taxes no longer trust the people spending them will spend wisely.

So people try to avoid paying.

There are other countries ( Scandi for example ) where, believe it or not, public servants are held to a little higher level of esteem. Tax evasion is less frequent there.

Funny, that...

[Eric Mc]

In Norway a couple of years ago, one political party FAILED to get elected partly because they were promising tax cuts.

A very different mind set.

[vonuber]

Marina Hyde (who is always good value) was quite amusing about this:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/22/reven...

[Einion Yrth]

Eric Mc said:

But not the principle of taxation.

As I said - you can argue that tax is too much or that it is not spent wisely. But that's another thread.

Taking money against someones will and with threat of violence. Looks like theft to me.

[allnighter]

Einion Yrth said:

Taking money against someones will and with threat of violence. Looks like theft to me.

and so is enjoying security, benefits, free health care etc... without paying your fair share.... oh hang on some people do that already!

[contractor]

Under COP8 http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pdfs/cop8.pdf

"A few people deliberately get things wrong to evade paying tax.
In some circumstances we can publish their details as well as
charging them a penalty. Deliberate evaders can stop us
publishing their details by telling us, as soon as we start the
check, about everything they deliberately did wrong. Also, the
more help they give us, the lower the penalty will be. You can find
more information about publishing deliberate evaders’ details in
factsheet CC/FS13 Publishing details of deliberate defaulters."