MoneySavingExpert.com has run a poll on people's attitude to tax cheating in the light of Jimmy Carr's escapades. The results are fascinating, although of course not scientific as the sample was self selected from those with a bias to save money:
Oddly the stats match almost exactly a survey HMRC was inclined to quote a few years back that was undertaken in Canada. there they found 10% would cheat, 40% could be persuaded to comply and 50% would do so just about whatever happened. Here that's 10:45:45 (near enough).
What are the lessons? I have to say I think they're obvious. What is very clear is that people will only cheat if they think they will get away with it. So what we need are many more staff at HMRC to make sure people can't get away with it.
The solution is so simple it's amazing the government doesn't listen. Because they don't I have to come to the conclusion they want a deficit and to pretend we are in debt than is actually the case instead of wanting to tackle the tax gap to pay for the public services we all need.
If this survey shows anything it says this problem is self made by the government.
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:
Buy me a coffee!
The conventional narrative says: austerity is a means to the end of reducing the deficit.
This has it exactly backwards.
In fact: the deficit is a means to the end of imposing austerity.
Precisely
While I’m sure MSS has its uses, I don’t think the cash crazed coupon clippers found there will be that representative of the great british public.
Though the way its worded shows that 90% wouldn’t do anything illegal, suggesting the solution lies with stern legislation and enforcement.
Naturally, to do this is one of those hard decisions that the conservative government will not take.
The anarchy of a dysfunctional state gives them so much more room for manoeuvre. The fog of class war,if you will.
This sly bit of propoganda just provides a little cover for those who can and do get away with it.
This data shows that 10% of people would cheat, not half.
Tax avoidance is cheating
which means 86% say they would cheat (the do what I could without taking the mickey too much is defined as avoidance in the answer).
Isn’t it a problem, in a democratic society, if 86% say that they would basically be happy to bend the laws for their own personal gain? Or, to use the morality argument, if 86% of people see no moral imperative to try to follow the spirit of the law?
Very clearly what you’re saying is not true
To use an ISA is not to bend the law
Now very politely, stop behaving like an offshore barrister and apply a little intelligence to your comments
Even try the truth
But using an ISA is in the 14% that is clearly acceptable.
I am just asking whether “Tax avoidance: I’d do what I could to reduce tax without taking the mickey too much” is within your definition of acceptable activity.
No need to be rude because you misread the stats.
Respectfully, as you’re a member of a profession notorious for not being able to read stats and are based in the Channel Islands where the law and truth have no relationship to each other (I’d remind you that you have legal sham trusts) I think that’s almost amusing
But let’s look at the facts – not taking the mickey too much must mean things like paying dividends from companies in lieu of salary. Avoidance in my view, yes. But acceptable to a great many, I admit, right now. I want to change that acceptability – but I accept few would think it aggressive tax avoidance at present and I would not suggest a general anti-avoidance principle be used against it – but that primary legislation should be.
In the context that popular perceptions framed these questions and answers and that such behaviour is not seen as avoidance right now by the majority (even if I disagree) does that answer your question?
yes, there is no need to play the man rather than the argument though. It is possible to be interested in a lot of the arguments you present and yet not come to the same conclusions as you, without being a right wing nutter.
I’ll take your word for it
I couldn’t possibly comment
Some agreement here, but must quallify your point about many more staff at HMRC.
Numbers may help of course, but not on their own, in my experience of HMRC it’s having the right amount of properly trained staff, in the right place, decent IT systems that talk to each other, and competent management. And a culture that is open and accountable .
And lastly the backbone to stand up to the Treasury when they think tax proposals are barking mad- which they often are.
But it starts at the top, successive Government tax policy is made in a rank amateur way. One can forget the class conspiracy theories, it’s hard to get across publicly just how incompetent the whole process is.