Families where no one has ever worked, nor wanted to, and claim all the benefits they can.

Please quote your source DJ

dj what are you saying? My first job here was a hard job with long hours on low pay - you know one of those that they couldn't recruit to, so yes, I did walk into it (with my eyes closed).

(I've got a British passport by the way when I got married in the 1980s you automatically got one if you married a UK citizen. It's much harder now with spouse visas etc.)

No need found this ....unemployment fall below 6%

I understand Alea, I shouldn't have said charismatic , but surely you don't think Blair had charisma ? I shall try to think of a politician who does/had , difficult

Grannyknot, I though you said Asian community

DJ I cannot see how doubling the number of people working at HMRC would make any difference to tax evasion when it is perfectly legal. Please explain?

I would however welcome money spent on training HMRC so they don't make so many mistakes and when they answer the phone to a pensioner they are not so patronising and assume we are too gaga to understand our own tax!

Yes, Blair had charisma. So did Thatcher (we've been here before), but Cameron hasn't and Miliband didn't. If Corbyn's got it, it doesn't show on tv but he's probably got more personality in the flesh, as it were (sounds a bit creepy actually...)

Annie you are someone else said about the Asian community and I'm saying the same thing happens in the SA community.

Tax avoidance is legal, but tax evasion is illegal.
Anyone who has an ISA is avoiding tax, it is perfectly legal. Some tax avoidance schemes are quite dodgy though, a lot of slebs have used them.

Nonnie - do they answer the phone then in the end?

Ana have you been on the [wine[?

No, I was replying, somewhat belatedly, to *Anniebach's post of 17.03.

Sorry Ana maybe it is time I started to I couldn't even get my brackets right!

djen - I did have a vision of you on the internet reading and posting links and thought I don't know how she does it (timewise), but you say you are sent them in emails - I know now!

I thought the same, rosequartz. I feel quite disillusioned...

rosequartz Some schemes are so complex that it is difficult, without an in-depth investigation, to establish whether they are tax avoidance or tax evasion schemes. A well known example was the K2 scheme, investigated by The Times and used by several high profile people.

The Times reported that at a seminar in Birmingham, Roy Lyness of Peak Performance told an undercover reporter that his scheme would net company directors 80% of their earnings. "A contractor will net approximately 82% of their earning after all taxes. And a director will net approximately 80% after all taxes and costs."

The scheme involved UK earners "quitting" their jobs and signing new employment contracts with offshore shell companies. Those companies then "rehired" their new employee back out to the UK but take their earnings. The offshore company then paid their employees a much lower salary but also "loaned" them thousands a month. However these loans were written down as tax liabilities, reducing the overall tax bill.

I'm not sure what the outcome of the HMRC investigation was. From what I've read, it appears it was ruled that the scheme was illegitimate because it was artificially constructed solely for the purpose of reducing the tax burden. I believe the scheme was closed but was not deemed to be fraudulent/illegal. I would imagine that the average person would probably be confused by this outcome - I certainly am. It seems that those who devise these schemes almost have carte blanche to "give it a go", knowing that only the most blatantly fraudulent schemes are likely to be adjudged illegal. On top of that, to investigate these schemes is, I believe, an expensive and time-consuming matter which will not be embarked upon unless the potential tax losses are very high. Because of this, it is likely that many illegitimate schemes continue undisturbed, with the loss of billions of pounds to the government.

Whether such schemes are deemed to be illegal or not, to my mind they are just plain wrong and those that employ them deserve nothing but contempt.

www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/gor/2092957698/report.aspx#

More up to date figures of the workforce than you have given, Alea.
However, if you go down the page, you will notice that they no longer give vacancies at jobcentres on that site. Probably because it shows them in a bad light.

The latest job vacancy figures are from January 2015 and listed as 700,000 in the DM.

Sorry, I mean Anya, but I'm sure Alea will be interested.

The link you give, Anya, does not actually give numbers of unemployed. As stated on Fullfact, they cannot be compared directly because they give numbers for one and percentages for another.

There are 460 mentions of HMRC on www.taxresearch.org.uk
This is just one of them, Nonnie.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/09/22/hmrc-is-wide-open-to-abuse-because-of-a-lack-of-staff/

"I posted this yesterday but have not had a response

Nellie how do you think we should deal with tax evasion? What process should we use?

I am posting it again and would be grateful to anyone who can give me an answer? The subject of all these awful people comes up time after time but no one will tell me how to stop them. So many other 'crimes' can be dealt with so I would like to know how to deal with this please."

Nonnie, why did you write this, then later say that tax evasion is legal?
Are they awful people or are they not?

More people working at HMRC will give them more time to answer the phone to you. When I have had the need to speak to someone at HMRC, they are invariably polite.

Thanks rose for the clarification, I suspect I am not alone in getting them confused

DJ sorry you are having cognitive issues. I wrote it because I wanted an answer to how to deal with it. Does that make it clearer? I should have put 'awful people' in quotes, I admit my mistake how about you?

DJ I think you will find that you are particularly fortunate that HMRC answer the phone to you (unless of course you have plenty of time to sit and wait) and that they are polite. My experience is that they do not like to be told (politely) that they have got it wrong! They assumed that because I am retired I can't work it out. My answer was "because I have my P60s and a calculator".

I believe that if they got it right the first time more often they would have more time to answer the phone! Efficiency is the key to many things not just throwing more money at it. Our experience on NHS admin leads to the same conclusion.

Were you having trouble sleeping last night?

I would advise the Labour Party to keep on and on at the government about tax loopholes and tax evasion, being careful not to get confused with tax avoidance.

This is an area where many on the right of politics agree with those on the left.

The subject needs to be tackled strongly in order to help the entire country.
And it wouldnt harm the Labour Party in the slightest. In fact they would be clapped and cheered by most of the electorate of Britain.

Sorry I mean *Anya but I am sure Alea will be interested^
00.33
Whatever makes you think that, DJ?

I don't think I have taken much interest in this thread, other than to say at the outset that I thought it was contentious and bound to foment discord rather than promote discussion.
(Oh and I was sarky about Tony Blair being "tangoed")

Possible late night confusion DJ?

Actually it was early morning Alea! Me pedantic, never

Half past midnight is still pretty much like late into the night to me, I think of early morning starting around some unspecified time before dawn
However, I was trying to be charitable (clearly wasted) in suggesting DJ was still up rather than "up early".