Furlough fraud 1st case
Discussion
Stay in Bed Instead said:
But HMRC know who your PAYE employees are, and I think only those previously reported under RTI could be claimed for. So HMRC can do real time ratification at the time of the claim.
Surely they are doing this?
There were/are all sorts of non checkable factors about the claims. Not all the criteria for a valid claim may have been true for individual employees included on the claim. HMRC are relying 100% on the applicant employer being truthful about these factors. HMRC has no way of checking that type of detail at the point of application.Surely they are doing this?
Gareth79 said:
I guess there's two types of fraud:
- Business applies for furlough for the employees are still working and the business is still doing well.
- Person applies for furlough for a business they have no connection with, and receives payments into their bank account.
The article mentions the person has a business, so I assume it's the former and they have a couple of hundred employees, some of whom reported the company. I guess HMRC could also detect businesses still trading by using VAT returns and various other data they have access to?
I think it’ll be much easier to catch the second category than the first. - Business applies for furlough for the employees are still working and the business is still doing well.
- Person applies for furlough for a business they have no connection with, and receives payments into their bank account.
The article mentions the person has a business, so I assume it's the former and they have a couple of hundred employees, some of whom reported the company. I guess HMRC could also detect businesses still trading by using VAT returns and various other data they have access to?
There are endless stories of unscrupulous businesses claiming furlough money for some/lots of their employees, without ever telling said employees (or actually “furloughing” them) - so they carry on working as normal.
The employee may or may not find out, but catching the employer relies on the employee testifying against them - giving evidence that they were indeed working. I expect many employees will not want to do this, let alone proactively dob their employer in to HMRC.
Gareth79 said:
I guess there's two types of fraud:
- Business applies for furlough for the employees are still working and the business is still doing well.
- Person applies for furlough for a business they have no connection with, and receives payments into their bank account.
The article mentions the person has a business, so I assume it's the former and they have a couple of hundred employees, some of whom reported the company. I guess HMRC could also detect businesses still trading by using VAT returns and various other data they have access to?
What's the chances that it's a business employing people under s- Business applies for furlough for the employees are still working and the business is still doing well.
- Person applies for furlough for a business they have no connection with, and receives payments into their bank account.
The article mentions the person has a business, so I assume it's the former and they have a couple of hundred employees, some of whom reported the company. I guess HMRC could also detect businesses still trading by using VAT returns and various other data they have access to?
t conditions, at way below minimum wage, probably people who have questionable legally to work and which hasn't even told those people they are on Furlough? 
AJL308 said:
What's the chances that it's a business employing people under st conditions, at way below minimum wage, probably people who have questionable legally to work and which hasn't even told those people they are on Furlough?
the outbreak in Leicester was traced to a clothing manufacturer who paid 3.5 per hour. I think everyone should have got a minimum wage payment, as the poorest had no choice except to work even if ill.t conditions, at way below minimum wage, probably people who have questionable legally to work and which hasn't even told those people they are on Furlough? My sister's ex-employer, a care home owner, is being pursued by HMRC for falsely claiming furlough payments for several staff who no longer worked there.
The fraud was discovered when my sister called HMRC to ask why she was paying "emergency" tax on her current job. Her ex-employer was claiming she still worked for him, and was furloughed, and HMRC assumed that she had 2 jobs.
She contacted several other people who had recently moved jobs, and he was doing the same for them.
No idea how he thought he would get away with it. Sister had received her P45 when she quit the job before Christmas, and had given it to her new employer.
The fraud was discovered when my sister called HMRC to ask why she was paying "emergency" tax on her current job. Her ex-employer was claiming she still worked for him, and was furloughed, and HMRC assumed that she had 2 jobs.
She contacted several other people who had recently moved jobs, and he was doing the same for them.
No idea how he thought he would get away with it. Sister had received her P45 when she quit the job before Christmas, and had given it to her new employer.
I had a call from HMRC last week advising me that I’d made a mistake on my first months furlough payment and I would need to adjust it on nexts months claim. I was a couple of £k out because I’d mistakenly put a full two weeks in the calculator rather than 10 days as I’d counted weekends. They were pretty on the ball in calling me and obviously even small amounts are being looked at. Hope they are just as keen with everyone.
Eric Mc said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Do you not have to input the employees name and NI number to make a furlough claim?
You do.I expect that claims were made using false employees. If that is the case, those false employees must have already been on the books before the furlough scheme was created - which in turn would indicate that these false employees were being used to perpetrate other types of frauds.
What beggars belief is that HMRC went ahead and paid the money out in the first place.
poo at Paul's said:
Eric Mc said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Do you not have to input the employees name and NI number to make a furlough claim?
You do.I expect that claims were made using false employees. If that is the case, those false employees must have already been on the books before the furlough scheme was created - which in turn would indicate that these false employees were being used to perpetrate other types of frauds.
What beggars belief is that HMRC went ahead and paid the money out in the first place.
loafer123 said:
poo at Paul's said:
Eric Mc said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Do you not have to input the employees name and NI number to make a furlough claim?
You do.I expect that claims were made using false employees. If that is the case, those false employees must have already been on the books before the furlough scheme was created - which in turn would indicate that these false employees were being used to perpetrate other types of frauds.
What beggars belief is that HMRC went ahead and paid the money out in the first place.
WestyCarl said:
We suspect the end of yr financial audits will check for this as well, it would be a trivial for them.
They don't carry out such "audits" unless they open up a full blown "tax enquiry" - which is only in a very small percentage of cases.Annual accounts figures do not reveal enough detail to give HMRC the ammunition they would need to spot fraud - unless the fraud was truly massive.
Over the past 20 years of submitting hundreds of company, sole trader and partnership accounts to HMRC, not one has been "audited" or investigated because of perceived anomalies in the accounts. HMRC does not review accounts in detail the way they used to prior to 1995.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff