{"id":11032,"date":"2011-07-13T11:24:00","date_gmt":"2011-07-13T10:24:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=11032"},"modified":"2011-07-13T11:24:00","modified_gmt":"2011-07-13T10:24:00","slug":"the-governments-accounts-are-blatantly-wrong-and-must-be-qualified","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2011\/07\/13\/the-governments-accounts-are-blatantly-wrong-and-must-be-qualified\/","title":{"rendered":"The government’s accounts are blatantly wrong and must be qualified"},"content":{"rendered":"

The UK government has \u00a0for the first time ever<\/a> issued a set of consolidated accounts covering its activities today<\/a>. \u00a0They are, admittedly in draft, but they are also blatantly wrong, and so seriously misstated that any auditor must be duty-bound to qualify them as being \u00a0a completely unfair view of the state of the government's finances.<\/p>\n

The reason for saying this is simple: \u00a0it is an absolute rule of accounting that revenue must be recognised as it falls due and any sum not collected must be treated as a bad debt. However, the revenue included in these accounts is the net sum of cash collected relating to the year 2010\/11. As such the accounts are stated net of losses to tax evasion, which the Revenue themselves admit might be \u00a335 billion a year<\/a>, and may be as high as \u00a370 billion a year in my estimate<\/a>, and they are also stated net of tax avoidance. \u00a0The Revenue have admitted they have \u00a325 billion<\/a> worth of tax avoidance subject to dispute at present, and I believe that this is the sum lost annually for this reason<\/a>.<\/p>\n

As a result I contend\u00a0that\u00a0the top line of these accounts is understated by at least \u00a395 billion, meaning they are grossly and materially misstated in accounting terms or, in layperson's terms, they are just a straightforward lie about the true financial state of the government.<\/p>\n

Unless and until the UK government can accept the fact that it fails to collect a very large part of the tax owing to it then we have no hope of economic competence \u00a0being restored at heart of government. Basic recognition of this truth is the first step towards achieving that goal, and these accounts suggest that the government remains in denial on this fundamental issue that could transform the well-being of the UK government, help slash the deficit to a point where it would be of no great consequence, restore social justice in this country by giving preference to honest people over cheats, and at the same time uphold the rule of law and the democratic will of Parliament.<\/p>\n

Right now, the government chooses to do none of those things. It prefers to \u00a0leave money in the pockets of cheats instead of using it to pay for pensions, provide education and ensure the health service is secure for the future. \u00a0Worse still, \u00a0by stating its accounts in this way it denies that there is even a problem to address.<\/p>\n

The government should be ashamed of these accounts and ashamed of their cowardice with regard to tax collection and\u00a0I sincerely hope that the auditor of these accounts has the courage to say that they do not represent a true fair view of the government's activities, because that is very obviously true. \u00a0If they do they will be doing \u00a0us all a great service: \u00a0this government may demand greater transparency and accountability but unless it adopts that maxim for itself then there is no hope of it being achieved elsewhere. \u00a0So far they \u00a0are a long way from coming up to scratch.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The UK government has \u00a0for the first time ever issued a set of consolidated accounts covering its activities today. \u00a0They are, admittedly in draft, but
 Read the full article…<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26,81,35,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11032","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-accounting","category-auditing","category-economics","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11032","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11032"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11032\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11032"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11032"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11032"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}