Anyone who has observed HMRC's continuing management debacles since its shotgun birth more than a decade ago will know that one name dominates its lists of cock-ups. That is that of its former director Dave Hartnett.
Now the Supreme Court has ruled that his comments to the press in 2012 breached his basic duty of confidentiality to a taxpayer and as a result millions in compensation will be payable.
It so happens that I agree with Margaret Hodge that there needs to be a lot more transparency about the workings of HMRC, but it was not its directors job to do that in breach of the law.
Thankfully Hartnett's says at HMRC are but a memory, but the basic structure of HMRC remains little changed. The culture of a Plc with non-execs drawn from big business who will be used to thinking the organisation exists for their own gratification is still the chosen model for its senior management. It was this that floored Hartnett - who I met, often, during his time in office. He did in the end seem to see HMRC as his personal fiefdom.
That was unacceptable and I think that nothing has so far been done to prevent a recurrence. The answer is, I suggest, independent oversight of HMRC from an Office for Tax Responsibility. Its time has come.
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:
I see what you are getting at, but rather than invent a new Quango, would it not be better to reform the HMRC, and get rid of the problems there which you identify?
Is there not already a Parliamentary committee that HMRC is answerable to? That would have the advantage of consisting of democratically elected members, and (I think) its proceedings are in the public domain. (I don’t know how transparent bodies like the existing OBR are – not 100% I suspect).
…oops…just googled and found this:
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/03/23/reforming-hm-revenue-custom/
in which you explain there is in fact no standing parliamentary committee overseeing it!
I have only skim-read the article, but it all looks very sound.
Perhaps an “Office of Tax responsibility” would be useful until such time as complete reform of HMRC becomes possible.
I think it is both
Plus the oversight of a dedicated committee
And it needs a dedicated minister
All explained in the Joy of Tax
I am not sure we should be pleased with this ruling. Should we not concentrate on:
“three Ingenious film partnerships considered by the first-tier tribunal, where HMRC was successful. This protected around £400m in revenues for the exchequer.”
Why should there be any compensation if comments were not defamation? What Hartnett let slip is surely stuff the public should have a right to know.
Hartnett’s failings are well documented but the current Excom are far worse. None are HMRC people, which probably explains why they are closing all but 14 HMRC offices. Would anybody be surprised if a member of Excom flogged schemes like those of Ingenious after they went back to private practice, taking advantage of the destruction they are wreaking on HMRC?
Agree the current Excom
And the problem re Ingeneous is he broke the law. Technically they only tried to avoid it.
I agree it’s falling, but compensation will be paid, I am sure.
This dire problem isn’t confined to HMRC, but also prevalent in Local Government where I worked for a number of years. The old standards of impartiality, fairness and honesty have vanished under the Cambridgeshire Tory helm as the CEs and their political ‘buddies’ conspired to create a cosy nest for themselves.