You know someone’s lost the plot when they put the fox in charge of the chicken coop.
This, apparently, is what The Treasury is planning to do at HMRC. According to the Mail (so this may be wrong — but it has the feeling of official briefing about it):
Ministers are secretly recruiting a squad of City experts to break an expected strike by tax collectors.
Treasury Ministers are drawing up plans to slash the number of taxmen as part of savage Whitehall spending cuts — but fear it will trigger a mass walk-out by staff at HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).
Such a move, by the most heavily unionised Whitehall department, could plunge the public finances into even greater chaos.
Now, in the clearest sign yet that the Government is gearing up for a new ‘winter of discontent’, Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude has ordered the creation of a special unit of pinstriped strike-breakers to be sent into HMRC to work as emergency tax collectors.
The strike-breakers would range from envelope-openers at dozens of Revenue offices across the country to senior City accountants seconded to HMRC head office.
As the also say:
The Treasury’s resolve to shake up HMRC has been hardened by this month’s tax fiasco, when the department was forced to send out letters to 5.7 million taxpayers admitting it had miscalculated the sums they owed.
A Government source said: ‘There is an awful lot of bad blood between the Treasury and HMRC at the moment, a great deal of mutual suspicion. HMRC feels, justifiably, that the Treasury wants them to bear an unfair proportion of the cuts. If they are severe, there could be a mass walkout, which would paralyse the revenue-raising operation.’
So we have the madness being planned of giving the prisoners the key to the jail — for this is what this plan amounts to, and all because of a squabble between the two ends of 100 Parliament Street — one end of which is occupied by HM Treasury and the other by HM Revenue & Customs.
I note with interest Mike Warburton of Grant Thornton approves of this plan. Just think of the opportunity accounts will have to settle a few cases in their own favour whilst seconded to HMRC!
The madness of ConDem plans is being steadily revealed by the day. But this one has to be from beyond the boundaries of credibility.
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:
Richard, you have really let your paranoia run away with you this time.
1. If the HMRC wish to strike, who will correctly assess and collect the taxes?
2. Years ago in South Africa, graduates (many of them who had completed their articles) were given the option of 2 years in the army or 4 years with the Revenue. A lot took the latter option and the result was the most efficient tax collection for decades.
3. What is your basis for asserting that those secondees will perpetrate fraud to settle cases in favour of either their clients or their employees? It may be equally said that those employed by HMRC may settle cases in favour of taxpayers in order to secure employment with firms of tax advisers. Both situations are ludicrous and an insult to the people involved.
@JayPee
I have no faith in the ethics of my profession
And nor have the Financial Reporting Council
You’re a fool if you think they wouldn’t abuse – or you’re an accountant
And your evidence or proof of the above is?
I am not sure where the FRC comes into the picture? Corporate reporting and tax collection are worlds apart, most proper tax advisers haven’t the foggiest about auditing having been trained as tax specialists.
@JayPee
KPMG
Fine $486 million for tax abuse
And on and on
This is a profession that believes in avoidance – in cheating
What else do I need to say?
@JayPee
@JayPee
You’re either an accountant or a consultant waxing lyrical about a rumour. The use of ‘mercenary accountants’ in RSA was a complete flop – from an organisational view as well as results. What’s worse, the majority of these ‘consciencous objectors turned collectors of client base’ provided little value in that their tax knowledge left much to be desired. The very few who remained with the orgnaisation beyond their ‘punishment period’ moved out of the technical business into management. Finally, improving tax collection during this era was not difficult – low hanging fruit and draconian laws, etc.
If 45% of all tax returns understate the tax liability I wonder what percentage of these were completed by agents. I suspect a fair few.