A story for VAT collecting businesses

[JPJPJP]

@whatcanyoudo8 has been pushing this case since 2011 without success

Just have it in mind next time you fill in your VAT return

https://twitter.com/whatcanyoudo8/status/127873001...

[Eric Mc]

Why can't he name the foreign business?

[JPJPJP]

Would you?

[Algarve]

I think without a business name its best just filed under "nonsense". Theres nothing at all that's verifiable, either in the story or the person posting it. He has no credibility at all.

[Eric Mc]

Correct.

It could be a fairy tale for all we know.

[JPJPJP]

Would Private Eye and the chap's MP run so far with it without doing some rudimentary checks?

[Doofus]

Have we got to read all of that?

[Countdown]

JPJPJP said:

Would Private Eye and the chap's MP run so far with it without doing some rudimentary checks?

Has this happened? There wasn't any reference to it in the link.

If I'm honest the references to "coming here from a corrupt war-torn Country to whom the UK gives lots of aid which disappears" made me think "hmmm...Nutter!". Plus apparently the perpetrator has "a degree from a top University and speaks 6 different languages" which made me think "hmmm....PH Director?"

According to the Twitter link Mr Dodgy Bloke started operating in 2011. He was also reported to HMRC in 2011. Why would he have been reported so quickly?

[JPJPJP]

Doofus said:

Have we got to read all of that?

Of course not, there is no requirement to read a single word of it

[JPJPJP]

Countdown said:

Has this happened? There wasn't any reference to it in the link.

If I'm honest the references to "coming here from a corrupt war-torn Country to whom the UK gives lots of aid which disappears" made me think "hmmm...Nutter!". Plus apparently the perpetrator has "a degree from a top University and speaks 6 different languages" which made me think "hmmm....PH Director?"

According to the Twitter link Mr Dodgy Bloke started operating in 2011. He was also reported to HMRC in 2011. Why would he have been reported so quickly?

the tweet states that the story has appeared in Private Eye four times and that the chap's MP has been in correspondence with a relevant Minister about the reasons cited by HMRC for not wanting to receive any more of his 'evidence'

[Doofus]

JPJPJP said:

Doofus said:

Have we got to read all of that?

Of course not, there is no requirement to read a single word of it

My point was that without doing so, you've given us no idea what it's about.

ETA: I've read it now. It seems more of a muck-flinging exercise than much else. As has been said; no names, no credibility.

Edited by Doofus on Friday 3rd July 11:28