MPs claim HMRC 'too cosy' with business
Discussion
elster said:
This is why the tax system needs simplifying.
The idea when Gideon got in was he was going to simplify this. It wouldn't be hard to simplify, as you would start from scratch rather than tweaking which is what has been done for decades. The problem is a tweak here is a loophole over there. Then there it means they have to write a new rule to cover the rule they just created. It gets silly.
Problem with online stuff is that you can have an 'agent' for your VAT payments, but not wish that same agent to have involvement in your Corp Tax or payroll tax - so there has to be, inevetably, more than one portal to the HMRC's systems. That's what Mrs Digga tells me anyway, shoot me down if I'm wrong, but it makes sense to me.The idea when Gideon got in was he was going to simplify this. It wouldn't be hard to simplify, as you would start from scratch rather than tweaking which is what has been done for decades. The problem is a tweak here is a loophole over there. Then there it means they have to write a new rule to cover the rule they just created. It gets silly.
elster said:
This is why the tax system needs simplifying.
The idea when Gideon got in was he was going to simplify this. It wouldn't be hard to simplify, as you would start from scratch rather than tweaking which is what has been done for decades. The problem is a tweak here is a loophole over there. Then there it means they have to write a new rule to cover the rule they just created. It gets silly.
I 100% agree.The idea when Gideon got in was he was going to simplify this. It wouldn't be hard to simplify, as you would start from scratch rather than tweaking which is what has been done for decades. The problem is a tweak here is a loophole over there. Then there it means they have to write a new rule to cover the rule they just created. It gets silly.
If the tax system was more straight forward I am sure that more tax would be collected.
What baffles me is that there are so many 'special cases' that everyone appears to be a frickin' 'special case' if they have a gob, time and especially money.
Cut it all off at the ankles. One simple set of rules for each tax or benefit with one scale of allowances or charges.
Over night the system would be more transparent, cheaper and easier to run, fairer, and doubtless collect more revenue.
But it will never happen as there are too many people, with more power than they should be allowed, on all sides, who all have vested interests in making it as complex as possible.
"Noting that Mr Hartnett alone had enjoyed 107 dinners and lunches with companies, tax lawyers and advisers over two years, the MPs raised concerns that relations could seem “unduly cosyâ€.
Umm, shouldn't she go jail ?
How the f
k can they appear before MPs and not want to co operate and why all this came from a whistleblower ?
Umm, shouldn't she go jail ?
How the f
k can they appear before MPs and not want to co operate and why all this came from a whistleblower ? frosted said:
How the fk can they appear before MPs and not want to co operate and why all this came from a whistleblower ?
No idea.k can they appear before MPs and not want to co operate and why all this came from a whistleblower ? If our SP had concerns about how I had dealt with one of my Client's files and I told them I wasn't prepared to answer their questions I'd be lucky only to find a card board box on my desk with a note saying "...and don't let the door hit your arse on the way out" attached to it.
ETA and that's regardless if there was anything of concern!
Rude-boy said:
I 100% agree.
If the tax system was more straight forward I am sure that more tax would be collected.
What baffles me is that there are so many 'special cases' that everyone appears to be a frickin' 'special case' if they have a gob, time and especially money.
Cut it all off at the ankles. One simple set of rules for each tax or benefit with one scale of allowances or charges.
Over night the system would be more transparent, cheaper and easier to run, fairer, and doubtless collect more revenue.
But it will never happen as there are too many people, with more power than they should be allowed, on all sides, who all have vested interests in making it as complex as possible.
HMRC want to keep tax as complex and hard to understand as possible in te belief if you find it hard to figure out its also hard to get around it . And the reason the rules keep changing is to aim to make it harder to evade ( shifting goalposts )If the tax system was more straight forward I am sure that more tax would be collected.
What baffles me is that there are so many 'special cases' that everyone appears to be a frickin' 'special case' if they have a gob, time and especially money.
Cut it all off at the ankles. One simple set of rules for each tax or benefit with one scale of allowances or charges.
Over night the system would be more transparent, cheaper and easier to run, fairer, and doubtless collect more revenue.
But it will never happen as there are too many people, with more power than they should be allowed, on all sides, who all have vested interests in making it as complex as possible.
Also provides more jobs for HMRC and for exHMRC advisors in industry.
Deva Link said:
I don't know whether the argument really holds water, but isn't there a school of thought that it's better to get something out of these large corporation than hound them into moving offshore?
HMRC fired a senior taxman a few years who was considered too close to the businesses he was dealing with (he was being wined and dined by them etc) but at the same time he was credited with bringing in large amounts of tax that they'd been struggling to collect. The current HMRC boss seems to have done pretty well on the wining and dining front.
There is that argument but its wrong.HMRC fired a senior taxman a few years who was considered too close to the businesses he was dealing with (he was being wined and dined by them etc) but at the same time he was credited with bringing in large amounts of tax that they'd been struggling to collect. The current HMRC boss seems to have done pretty well on the wining and dining front.
If I don't pay my income or corporate tax the tax man, who I have never met will take me to court and he will win. I will either have to pay or I will go to jail.
The law as it stands says that you make a return, the tax office can accept it, or they cannot. Your word has little to do with it. So if the tax man wants you to pay more, you have to. This applies to Vodafone as much as me.
At no point does the taxman have to wine and dine anyone to get what the state can just ask for. If vodafone (eg) don't like it the the CFO or CEO can go to jail, as paying the tax is their responsibility. There is no need for the state to be nice to anyone.
HMRC have too much power now, they can fine you at a whim, with little or no justification, I have recently been on the receiving end of their unreasonableness, it appears that the current situation is that if you upset them you will regret it.
Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
alfaman said:
HMRC want to keep tax as complex and hard to understand as possible in te belief if you find it hard to figure out its also hard to get around it . And the reason the rules keep changing is to aim to make it harder to evade ( shifting goalposts )
Also provides more jobs for HMRC and for exHMRC advisors in industry.
And the accountants and the lawyers and old Uncle Tom Cobbly and all.Also provides more jobs for HMRC and for exHMRC advisors in industry.
As I said, too many vested interests for common sense to ever prevail...
Adrian W said:
HMRC have too much power now, they can fine you at a whim, with little or no justification, I have recently been on the receiving end of their unreasonableness, it appears that the current situation is that if you upset them you will regret it.
Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
They always have had that sort of power. And they can still use their right to come and search your property without any warrant.Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
Mikeyboy said:
Adrian W said:
HMRC have too much power now, they can fine you at a whim, with little or no justification, I have recently been on the receiving end of their unreasonableness, it appears that the current situation is that if you upset them you will regret it.
Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
They always have had that sort of power. And they can still use their right to come and search your property without any warrant.Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
Adrian W said:
No the rules have changed, if THEY BELIEVE you have been careless or deliberately filled wrong information, a civil servant can issue punitive fines, with no right of appeal. I very recently came up against this; luckily for me they believed me. If they hadn’t it would have cost me a fortune.
Seriously, they have always been able to do that. Previously they may not have put fines on, that is a relatively modern spin on their powers. But they could just stick you in jail, which was not better in my opinion.We are only "helping" the tax authorities to file our own returns. In fact the tax authorities are the sole determinators of how much tax you owe. If you don't pay it? You will be fined, or thrown in jail.
Mikeyboy said:
Seriously, they have always been able to do that. Previously they may not have put fines on, that is a relatively modern spin on their powers. But they could just stick you in jail, which was not better in my opinion.
We are only "helping" the tax authorities to file our own returns. In fact the tax authorities are the sole determinators of how much tax you owe. If you don't pay it? You will be fined, or thrown in jail.
I made a nil value asset claim, they believed it was a capital loss, you will not believe the resources they put into proving me wrong, and it turned out two letters from two firms of accountants had crossed in the post. Maybe their time would have been better spent investigating the large corporations in today’s news. We are only "helping" the tax authorities to file our own returns. In fact the tax authorities are the sole determinators of how much tax you owe. If you don't pay it? You will be fined, or thrown in jail.
Adrian W said:
I made a nil value asset claim, they believed it was a capital loss, you will not believe the resources they put into proving me wrong, and it turned out two letters from two firms of accountants had crossed in the post. Maybe their time would have been better spent investigating the large corporations in today’s news.
Absolutely agree.Adrian W said:
HMRC have too much power now, they can fine you at a whim, with little or no justification, I have recently been on the receiving end of their unreasonableness, it appears that the current situation is that if you upset them you will regret it.
Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
There are ways of pissing HMRC off while being fully compliant. Of course if you are in the club you can get away with anything.
Mikeyboy said:
If I don't pay my income or corporate tax the tax man, who I have never met will take me to court and he will win. I will either have to pay or I will go to jail.
The law as it stands says that you make a return, the tax office can accept it, or they cannot. Your word has little to do with it. So if the tax man wants you to pay more, you have to. This applies to Vodafone as much as me.
To be fair, the business of a large multi-national is a lot more ecomplicated than that of an individual, or even a small enterprise.The law as it stands says that you make a return, the tax office can accept it, or they cannot. Your word has little to do with it. So if the tax man wants you to pay more, you have to. This applies to Vodafone as much as me.
plasticpig said:
There are ways of pissing HMRC off while being fully compliant.
My old man once patted a C&E chap on the head whilst he was doing a VAT inspection and said "Bless him, he’s just like a little terrier isn’t he." VAT man not amused, his colleague and my mum trying to look all serious and not to crack-up.
Still couldn't find anythign wrong with the books that wasn't in our favour (if in doubt pay the tax, it's more fun getting it back off them than having a bill you didn't expect!)
Most likely would be arrested for assault these days
Deva Link said:
To be fair, the business of a large multi-national is a lot more ecomplicated than that of an individual, or even a small enterprise.
It is, but what has that got to do with their needing to be schmoozed?As I see it, my tax return may be easier to work out but at the end of it, the same thing is required by the HMRC. A calculation of how much you think you owe.
If they think differently they can get you audited, at your expense, ahile you rack up the fines and interest. If they think it is right you pay, as soon as they want it, not three years later. Neither of these things re up for negotiation in the law, whether you are Vodafone or John Smith Plumbers
If they don't want to do either it doesn't need the head of the HMRC to go and see the CFO and have a nice dinner with him to get him to pay. It takes the CFO getting a summons.
Rude-boy said:
Still couldn't find anythign wrong with the books that wasn't in our favour (if in doubt pay the tax, it's more fun getting it back off them than having a bill you didn't expect!)
Wiley practitioners say always leave a little something for them to find. 
Edited by Deva Link on Tuesday 20th December 14:39
Mikeyboy said:
As I see it, my tax return may be easier to work out but at the end of it, the same thing is required by the HMRC. A calculation of how much you think you owe.
If they think differently they can get you audited, at your expense, ahile you rack up the fines and interest. If they think it is right you pay, as soon as they want it, not three years later. Neither of these things re up for negotiation in the law, whether you are Vodafone or John Smith Plumbers
I don't know what you do but with a multi-national, and especially one that's dealing in stuff like wireless telecom which isn't even a physical commodity) it's not always easy to determine where money is made and so where the tax should be paid. Vodafone probably has options about where to declare sections of its profit and will organise things so they pay least tax. These things really aren't black and white.If they think differently they can get you audited, at your expense, ahile you rack up the fines and interest. If they think it is right you pay, as soon as they want it, not three years later. Neither of these things re up for negotiation in the law, whether you are Vodafone or John Smith Plumbers
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff