I was amused to note this on Fox Business news in the USA:
U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said on Wednesday that if the IRS were funded appropriately and therefore able to crack down on tax cheats, the U.S. would be able to collect more revenue without raising taxes.
“The tax gap is huge, and I think we would have a fairer tax system and collect more tax revenue without the need to raise rates if we resourced the IRS properly to be able to address this issue,” Yellen said during testimony before the Senate.
She is right, of course.
I have been saying this for more than a decade.
Now, if only HM Revenue & Customs would take note.
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:
Of course, it helps the debate if figures you put forward make any sense. There was plenty of criticism of your “120bn” figure, including double counting and flawed methodologies. The two most ridiculous elements of your numbers were discussed in a HoC review.
“The Tax Research estimate of tax debt is £28 billion. That is a snapshot figure of all tax owed to HMRC on 31 March 2009, which does not represent the actual losses to the Exchequer from non-payment. Almost all tax owed to HMRC is eventually paid,
… Only the tax debt written off as uncollectable by HMRC is an actual loss to the Exchequer from debt…which in the 2007-08 tax gap
figures was not £28 billion but £3 billion …
…The final and most significant point concerns tax loss due to tax avoidance, which Tax Research estimates at £25 billion. That
estimate includes the use of legitimate reliefs promoted by the Government to encourage certain activities, such as capital
allowances to encourage investment and research and development tax credits to encourage innovation. Tax avoidance is
generally regarded as the use of legal structures and allowances to reduce tax bills in manners not intended by Parliament when
enacting the legislation. It is simply nonsense to categorise as tax avoidance the use of allowances for purposes intended by
Parliament ”
You managed to add £50bn to the tax gap by including legitimate reliefs, used as intended, and tax that was actually collected.
And the report concluded that your figures.
“…could be dangerous if not countered by HMRC’s published estimates … partly because they give a misleading view of HMRC’s effectiveness and the amount of uncollected revenues. But also because they encourage the perception that deliberate non-compliance in the UK is the norm–a perception which could encourage further non-compliance.”
Is that what you were trying to do? Encourage a false perception to encourage further non-compliance? I think we can understand why HMRC aren’t ‘taking note’ of what you say.
I have answered all those points ma ny times
For example, re debt, I used the HMRC for debt written off. The figure was their own. My work references the source
ANd I added not one penn for legitimate reliefs – you made that up
Respectfully, you are wrong
Don’t waste my time by replying
ED NOTE
This comment has been deleted
It is made in what is likely to be at least the third identity that the person posting has used, all written in identical style
It has been shown numerous times that spending vast sums chasing benefit fraud is useful mainly in providing jobs for DHSS staff. The same money spent on tax fraud investigation produces vastly better returns, but possibly upsets Tory Party donors.
Got me thinking. How true are the figures on this official somewhat biased UK Govt site?
https://www.deliveringforscotland.gov.uk/scotland-in-the-uk/public-spending/