HMRC have published new qualitative research on the attitudes of those given custodial sentences for tax evasion.
I have not read it all in detail - but have scanned it and see some issues of real concern with the document, including this statement:
Whilst not cited as a reason for committing tax evasion, it was clear that negative views of tax and perceptions of an unfair tax system sometimes underpinned offending.
I think writing in answers from witnesses an unusual thing to do in such work.
That said, for those interested in this area this is new research, and worth a look so I give it a nod.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
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!
I see that as an opportunity, not a threat. People have negative views of tax; so they need education about the Joy of Tax. All it needs is someone to write a book about it… 🙂
Really?
Tax is extortion Richard (as people have reminded you)
It should be hated. Nevertheless it should be paid or else you got to Jail.
The reason for that is that it is a prerequisite for the government to be able to operate its policies through currency issue, the acceptance of which is driven by the aforementioned extortion. Clearly a sovereign government does not need tax receipts to be able to spend but it does need to be able divert real resources away from the private sector in order to fulfil its public sector role. That role may also include the reduction of inequality where tax is a key tool.
Tax is not extortion and never will be
You are wrong
Someday, I must dissect that ‘tax is extortion’ fallacy.
Fallacy, or falsehood, or delusion? And why are people so eager to believe it?
The short answer is: all tax is extortion if, and only if, you regard your government as illegitimate.
That’s a worrying thing for a citizen in a democracy to believe: it seems that disengagement from the economic obligations of society is accompanied by civic alienation and emotional withdrawal from the forms and principles of democracy and government by consent.
Or, less politely: “all governments are tyrannies and I pay nothing to a tyrant, unless that tyrant happens to be me”.
I address it The Joy of Tax
What a bizarre view. I take it that you would prefer to directly fund your own security service, pay a toll on any road that you use, carry a torch with you wherever you go as there would be no street lights, hope not to be set upon by beggars etc etc.
Or, as I would hope a majority of us feel, collectively paid for services, funded via a fair tax system is rather more effective and efficient.
If you want to argue that governments could be more efficient, or that they spend some money on unnecessary things- like going to war / replacing Trident or that the current balance of who pays what tax is unfair, hat is another argument.
To Nile and Richard – Nile states “all tax is extortion if, and only if, you regard your government as illegitimate” – I should like to add “or if your government fails to fulfil its duty in providing an adequate sovereign money supply appropriate to the scale of the economy”
The research is based on a tiny number of offenders,(12 in depth interviews)and probably not statistically valid. Which is why they depend on what the offenders have said.
With my magistrate’s hat on I would say the conclusions about the deterrent effect of custodial sentencing are too vague to be of real interest. As are the conclusions about prosecution, regardless of what sentence is imposed.
My personal view is that the value of custodial sentences is highly questionable except in circumstances of violent and dangerous offenders, from whom the public should be protected. The deterrent effect of incarceration is also questionable. It’s one of those subjects, a bit like economics, where it is very hard to budge public and expert opinion away from ancient and comfortable assumptions, in favour of what really works.
Quite rightly the offenders in this study point out the expense to the public purse of keeping them inside. High community penalties, including unpaid work in the community, tagging (curfew), as well as hefty fines, would make more sense.
As far as reducing tax evasion is concerned, two things will help to achieve this. One is public education about how and why we pay taxes. The second is much better enforcement by the ludicrously understaffed HMRC (as you pointed out to the cloth eared Andrew Neil this morning). If we paid as much attention to the tax evaders in our midst as we do to alleged terrorists, we could make some progress in this area.
I agree with you, in very large part
Imprisoning for tax makes little sense
It’s expsoure that has then impact
And recovery of the proceeds of the crime plus penalties
As for the research: what I have read wouyld not have passed serious review