I see the National Audit Office has said:
HM Revenue & Customs faces a significant challenge in securing a £1.6 billion reduction in running costs over the next four years, at the same time as increasing tax revenues, improving customer service and achieving reductions in welfare payments, according to a report today by the National Audit Office.
That's an understatement.
They might just as well have said they can't do it - because that's the reality.
Worse, the harm of trying is going to be high. I note this:
OVER a quarter (26 per cent) of large businesses are considering a full or part relocation abroad, with Britain's high and complex taxes remaining their main cause for complaint.
More than half (58 per cent) of the businesses eyeing a move to foreign shores cited tax issues as a leading factor, according to research by HMRC.
Around one in five (19 per cent) of those considering a move cited general business tax issues as their primary complaint, while 13 per cent said that more favourable tax conditions in other countries had prompted them to consider a move.
Over three quarters (78 per cent) of HMRC's “large business service” customers said that the administrative burden of tax compliance had increased from 2009 to 2010.
Read between the lines - that says poor service is driving people away. Not tax rates. And that's the fault of the people at HMRC - there's just not enough of them.
It's economic suicide to cut tax staff when you need every penny of tax revenue you can get.
Recruit more people now: that answer is simple. Let's cut this deficit. Not increase it.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
[…] ability to achieve 25 percent cost savings over the next four years. Tax expert Richard Murphy put it more bluntly: They might just as well have said they can’t do it – because that’s the […]
What does poor service mean Richard? Aren’t we in a self assessment regime? What service is actually required by these companies under your statement. I thought they filed a return waited a year and then it was agreed unless an audit was commenced?
Taking your thesis to it’s logical conclusion are you suggesting that companies would feel they would get better service (whatever that is) from an overseas revenue authority? Seems a strange reason to redomicile to me!
If you have to ask you a) don’t know b) aren’t in business c) have never had to deal with a tax problem