I was at a PCS “drop in” briefing session on the tax gap at the House of Commons this afternoon.
A fascinating cross section of MPs attended from across the political spectrum – Tories being well represented.
At the end of the afternoon I was amazed to discover 40 MPs had attended. That’s an astonishing number for a small parliamentary briefing. And across the spectrum there was agreement on three things.
The first is there is a tax gap.
The second is that calculating the last penny’s worth is not the issue of importance. There was widespread belief that HMRC had understated the claim – and in fairness some scepticism from one quarter in the main that my number may be too big – but also agreement that wherever the real number was in the remaining range this is an issue of massive importance.
Which led to the third point of agreement - which was that in the face of this cutting staff at H M Revenue & Customs makes no sense at all.
For an issue unheard of a few years ago that is a massive step forward.
NB Posted 12 hours later than planned due to IT problems
[…] the most surprising attendee at the PCS drop in session I’ve just blogged was John Redwood […]
[…] the most surprising attendee at the PCS drop in session I’ve just blogged was John Redwood […]
Richard,
In the recent briefing paper you stated that the practice of public sector employees taking bungs was widespread. Could you please substantiate these allegations, or withdraw them?
Also, that component of the tax gap which relates to late paid tax does not include late tax recovered from previous years. Can you confirm this is correct and if so explain why you have diverged from a very standard accounting practice.
@Martin
I stated what I believe to be true
Am I wrong?
Can you prove it?
There are many reports on fraud in the UK – many suggesting it happens in the public sector
Are you saying all those reports are wrong?
Is the onus normally on someone to prove a negative, or on the person making a (very serious) accusation to prove it? Normally the latter.
I doubt any of those reports would stand up in court unless they gave specific information identifying key people (and it would be good if you could give links to these reports suggetsing it happens in the public sector).
@Martin
The tax gap is clearly made up of stock and flow
I’ve never suggested otherwise
There is a stock of debt. If we had it we would not borrow that sum
That debt is, however, increasing significantly
There is a flow of avoidance and evasion. They recur annually
But at a point of time when you begin to tackle the issue of the tax gap – which no one would talk about if I had not raised it – the two are additive. So I can total them now
@Martin
Start here and keep going http://www.bdo.uk.com/services/advisory/fraud-and-financial-crime/fraudtrack
And note they say much fraud is never reported
And who cares if they’ll stand up in court? Are you threatening legal action?
99.999% of debate would not stand up in court
It does not prove it’s wrong
Is your aim to suppress free speech?
@Martin
I suggest you take a subscription for Private Eye and regularly read their Rotten Boroughs page.
Carol
Wish I’d thought of saying that!
R
@Richard Murphy
I assume your post #4 was in response to my query about not netting off recovered tax against unpaid tax. In which case you have completely, utterly and impressively failed to address the issue.
I have still yet to see evidence that HMRC officials are taking bungs to collect less than the legally required amount of tax from citizens. I just think the quote you made should have been backed up by proof – it is just too wild a claim to idly pass off like that. And I have noticed a lot of your claims are simply passed off as fact. Your logic and reasoning are spectactularly flawed at times.
@Martin
Hardly surprising I did not answer your allegation
I never made the suggestion you thought I should respond to in the first place
Of course I did not say that HMRC are taking bungs
I said their was fraud in the public sector
And there is, as a matter of fact
I’m sorry – but on this basis your assertions are wrong. If you will argue with straw men rather than what I say it does not help your cause
“Of course I did not say that HMRC are taking bungs”
Sorry, that’s just not true. You said in the briefing:
“Nor should they argue that the shadow economy does not extend to the state sector where it takes a different form in terms of bribes and other payments made to officials, a problem little acknowledged but which is universal AND WHICH ALSO CONTRIBUTES TO THE TAX GAP.” (my capitals added).
It seems clear to me, and I suspect every other person reading this, that you are suggesting HMRC take bungs.
@Martin
Absolutely and emphatically not true
I was explicitly saying that such illicit payments, usually for the procurement of contracts, are themselves a contribution to the tax gap as they are untaxed, unsurprisingly
Your interpretation is completely and utterly wrong.
I never ever meant what you said – now stop wasting my time pursuing a pointless argument which has no foundation to it at all