<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: HM Revenue &#038; Customs improving tax recoveries</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/</link>
	<description>Richard Murphy on tax and corporate accountability</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:42:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tax Research LLP</title>
		<link>http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-359233</link>
		<dc:creator>Tax Research LLP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:40:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-359233</guid>
		<description>Mark

Agreed - here should more emphasis on the number of enquiries and investigations

Richard</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark</p>
<p>Agreed - here should more emphasis on the number of enquiries and investigations</p>
<p>Richard</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HMRC and IRS catching more tax evaders : AccMan</title>
		<link>http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-359045</link>
		<dc:creator>HMRC and IRS catching more tax evaders : AccMan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 04:52:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-359045</guid>
		<description>[...] an aside, I was surprised with Richard Murphy&#8217;s assertion that:   The fact that the tax recovered from small business is such a small part of total [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] an aside, I was surprised with Richard Murphy&#8217;s assertion that:   The fact that the tax recovered from small business is such a small part of total [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Lee</title>
		<link>http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-358659</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:28:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-358659</guid>
		<description>When the merger of IR and HMC&#38;E was announced I was privileged to attend a meeting (as a rep of ICAEW) at 11 Downing Street when Gus O'Donnell tried to justify the staff cuts that had also just been announced.

I recall saying to him (and still believe) that the tax take would go up if there were more people telling their mates about how they'd been caught out by the Revenue.  That would require more investigations (risk based and random) so as to catch out more people who have tried it on. I'm afraid that human nature being what it is there are probably plenty of people sailing close to the wind and also a goodly number who consciously underdeclare their self employed income.  

In the first year of, what was then, the new Self Assessment system 10 years ago the Revenue seemed to be adopt a generous and laid back approach.  There were far fewer enquiries even in the final month of the first enquiry wiindow.  So us professionals advised our clients to expect more enquiries the following year.  But it didn't happen then either. In fact it never happened. Over the last ten years there has been a systemic failure by the Revenue to ensure that cheating tax payers are discouraged and honest taxpayers encouraged to fully declare their income.

The Government's targets place all of the emphasis on the aggregate level of tax, interest and penalties collected through their investigations. I think there should more emphasis on the number of enquiries and investigations.  As things stand I'd bet more people 'down the pub', at the golf club and elsewhere swap stories about what they've 'got away with' than about how they've been caught out.

Until and unless that situation changes the headline figures of tax collected through investigations will have no impact on the chancers who do not pay the 'right' amount of tax. None of their mates have been caught so those big numbers must relate to the big boys. After all, the Revenue are no longer interested in 'small fry'.  At least that's my view of the general perception.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When the merger of IR and HMC&amp;E was announced I was privileged to attend a meeting (as a rep of ICAEW) at 11 Downing Street when Gus O&#8217;Donnell tried to justify the staff cuts that had also just been announced.</p>
<p>I recall saying to him (and still believe) that the tax take would go up if there were more people telling their mates about how they&#8217;d been caught out by the Revenue.  That would require more investigations (risk based and random) so as to catch out more people who have tried it on. I&#8217;m afraid that human nature being what it is there are probably plenty of people sailing close to the wind and also a goodly number who consciously underdeclare their self employed income.  </p>
<p>In the first year of, what was then, the new Self Assessment system 10 years ago the Revenue seemed to be adopt a generous and laid back approach.  There were far fewer enquiries even in the final month of the first enquiry wiindow.  So us professionals advised our clients to expect more enquiries the following year.  But it didn&#8217;t happen then either. In fact it never happened. Over the last ten years there has been a systemic failure by the Revenue to ensure that cheating tax payers are discouraged and honest taxpayers encouraged to fully declare their income.</p>
<p>The Government&#8217;s targets place all of the emphasis on the aggregate level of tax, interest and penalties collected through their investigations. I think there should more emphasis on the number of enquiries and investigations.  As things stand I&#8217;d bet more people &#8216;down the pub&#8217;, at the golf club and elsewhere swap stories about what they&#8217;ve &#8216;got away with&#8217; than about how they&#8217;ve been caught out.</p>
<p>Until and unless that situation changes the headline figures of tax collected through investigations will have no impact on the chancers who do not pay the &#8216;right&#8217; amount of tax. None of their mates have been caught so those big numbers must relate to the big boys. After all, the Revenue are no longer interested in &#8217;small fry&#8217;.  At least that&#8217;s my view of the general perception.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tax Research LLP</title>
		<link>http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-358619</link>
		<dc:creator>Tax Research LLP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:26:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-358619</guid>
		<description>Jason

I am afraid none of the evidence supports your opinion. Sorry. The fact is the self employed systematically underdecalre their income. 

Richard</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jason</p>
<p>I am afraid none of the evidence supports your opinion. Sorry. The fact is the self employed systematically underdecalre their income. </p>
<p>Richard</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Holden</title>
		<link>http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-358576</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Holden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2008/01/22/hm-revenue-customs-improving-tax-recoveries/#comment-358576</guid>
		<description>Or is it quite simply that the smaller business sector is in fact more compliant than the Revenue, and others, (mis)lead people into thinking? 

I would imagine that it is not so much that the smaller business is not compliant, because I don’t think that is the case.

What I imagine is more the case, it is those who operate on the ‘black market economy’ without ever registering with the Revenue who are responsible for any tax gap and not those who register!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or is it quite simply that the smaller business sector is in fact more compliant than the Revenue, and others, (mis)lead people into thinking? </p>
<p>I would imagine that it is not so much that the smaller business is not compliant, because I don’t think that is the case.</p>
<p>What I imagine is more the case, it is those who operate on the ‘black market economy’ without ever registering with the Revenue who are responsible for any tax gap and not those who register!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
