Going after the economically disadvantaged!

Germanshepherdsmum

Well said rafichagran. Sorry GagaJo, fraud is fraud and has to be rooted out and punished. I have been desperate. I have not committed fraud.

There is what is legal and there is what is moral. It is immoral that individuals, Sunak say, can avoid paying tax because he can afford an expensive accountant, whereas the 'cash in hand' benefit claimant has no one to help them.

Sadly, we are led by an utterly immoral government who are only interested in increasing their own wealth, while hammering the poor. Where is Dickens when we need him?

IMO it is illegal and immoral to commit benefit fraud when those doing so are taking money they are not entitled too by lying.

I doubt if that occurs when people are trying to feed their children or keep a roof over their heads.

I doubt that all who commit benefit fraud do so because if they didn't they wouldn't be able to feed their children or keep a roof over their heads.

Smileless2012

I doubt that all who commit benefit fraud do so because if they didn't they wouldn't be able to feed their children or keep a roof over their heads.

I'm sure there are some that play the system. But most people on benefits are on the breadline. Therefore any illegality is from desperation.

Sunak and his ilk can hardly claim the same.

But yes, I appreciate some do not understand the depths of poverty people now live in, in the UK and therefore are not aquainted with how desperate the poor are. Either that or they just don't care.

There was a woman on TV earlier moaning about how they’d had to sell one car, might be forced to sell another, stopped the swimming lessons and wouldn’t be able to afford a foreign holiday this year.

Forsythia

There was a woman on TV earlier moaning about how they’d had to sell one car, might be forced to sell another, stopped the swimming lessons and wouldn’t be able to afford a foreign holiday this year.

Your point is?

HousePlantQueen

Forsythia

There was a woman on TV earlier moaning about how they’d had to sell one car, might be forced to sell another, stopped the swimming lessons and wouldn’t be able to afford a foreign holiday this year.

Your point is?

And what’s your point?

Allsorts

Tax avoidance is very much a crime, carries stiff penalties and imprisonment.

No, that's tax evasion. big difference.

Norah

Quote: "Some examples of legitimate tax avoidance include putting your money into an Individual Savings Account (ISA) to avoid paying income tax on the interest earned by your cash savings, investing money into a pension scheme, or claiming capital allowances on things used for business purposes."

Perfectly normal avoidance, follow the rules and all is well.

Why on earth should businesses not be able to claim capital allowances for equipment? Absolute nonsense! There would be a lot fewer businesses if people couldn't get tax relief for equipment, which is often a major purchase.

Dinahmo

Norah

Quote: "Some examples of legitimate tax avoidance include putting your money into an Individual Savings Account (ISA) to avoid paying income tax on the interest earned by your cash savings, investing money into a pension scheme, or claiming capital allowances on things used for business purposes."

Perfectly normal avoidance, follow the rules and all is well.

Why on earth should businesses not be able to claim capital allowances for equipment? Absolute nonsense! There would be a lot fewer businesses if people couldn't get tax relief for equipment, which is often a major purchase.

Indeed. Capital allowances is part to my quote of some examples of legitimate tax avoidance. My husband would be out of business without tax relief on equipment purchases.

Sadly it's easier to go after people committing benefit fraud and indeed low level tax avoidance. Those people will usually cave in if investigated.

How many people can honestly say that they've never paid cash in hand to a window cleaner, gardener, house cleaner or for any other of the smaller tasks that need doing?

Norah Claiming capital allowances is not part of tax avoidance. It's tax relief. There's a difference. I work from home and clam tax relief for my costs - postage, stationery, computer software and repairs. I also claim capital allowances for my computer.. These are all legitimate expenses. Not tax avoidance.

Tax avoidance is when people like Sunak are advised to sell shareholdings in order to take the gains, rather than take the dividends arising. Gains are taxable at 20% for higher rate taxpayers rather than dividends where the higher rate is currently 40% and the additional rate is 45%. My understanding is that Sunak didn't actually withdraw the gains he merely left the gains to accrue and paid over the tax.

Tax evasion is where income is not declared when it should be.

I can remember in the old days when couples were advised not to marry because they'd be better off co-habiting.

GagaJo

I doubt if that occurs when people are trying to feed their children or keep a roof over their heads.

I disagree gagajust because people are on benefits does not make them not know right from wrong.
In the work I do I come across many people on benefits and they do not commit fraud.
Times are hard at the moment, and prices are rising, but they manage, and their children are not hungry.

Dinahmo

Norah Claiming capital allowances is not part of tax avoidance. It's tax relief. There's a difference. I work from home and clam tax relief for my costs - postage, stationery, computer software and repairs. I also claim capital allowances for my computer.. These are all legitimate expenses. Not tax avoidance.

Tax avoidance is when people like Sunak are advised to sell shareholdings in order to take the gains, rather than take the dividends arising. Gains are taxable at 20% for higher rate taxpayers rather than dividends where the higher rate is currently 40% and the additional rate is 45%. My understanding is that Sunak didn't actually withdraw the gains he merely left the gains to accrue and paid over the tax.

Tax evasion is where income is not declared when it should be.

I can remember in the old days when couples were advised not to marry because they'd be better off co-habiting.

Tax relief in my husband's business by way of recording all legitimate expenses - costs and purchases, avoids tax on profits.

I believe we're saying the same thing.

I just amass records that the accountant tells me to keep.

The whole country is set up this way.

Blame the poor, keep them in their place. Have them so angry at each other they don't notice the rich quietly profiting off the backs of workforces who are inadequately compensated for their labour, without which their business and third homes wouldn't exist.

The truth is all the benefit frauds in a large town could not pay for one all expenses paid trip abroad for a bit of hand shaking by a politician.

Fraud is fraud yes, but there is a big difference between a few hundred and a few million.

Which is why we treat someone who steals a sandwich because they are hungry very differently to someone who robs a bank.

Fix the system, make it so that people are actually better off in work. Make sure they are adequately compensated for it, and benefit fraud likely goes away.

Or begrudge a hungry person a "sandwich" while a bank robber screws up everybody's interest rates and hides the money away where it benefits no-one and especially not the economy..

It's the British way apparently. Meanwhile, our wages quietly sink to an all-time low against many smarter European countries

Tax evasion is a crime. Tax avoidance isn’t.

I've always paid my window cleaners cash, that's not to say that they're not declaring everything they earn.

I do not think the OP is suggesting that benefit fraud should not be pursued and dealt with, just that the police should stop going for easy targets over larger ones, where the financial gain to the nation would incidentally be greater.

Having been a social worker for many years I can firmly state that there are far more people not getting the benefits to which they are entitled than there are people cheating the system.

I think you need to re-read her post Lucky. Her references to shifting the focus, fewer court cases, fewer people in prison, fewer families destroyed clearly point to a desire to see fewer benefit fraudsters pursued.

The occasional high-value benefit fraud committed by criminals should not allow us to be distracted from serious tax evasion by wealthy individuals (which is also fraudulent and illegal). Most individual benefit fraud is trivial in value, driven by poverty and inadequate funding of the benefits system. Tax avoidance (which is not illegal) happens because Parliament does not legislate to close loopholes exploited by (mainly) the wealthy who can afford expensive lawyers and accountants and by international companies which ensure their profits occur in low tax countries. These latter require international action. One suspects the Tories never want to close loopholes significantly because they depend on donations from the wealthy and companies and the right wing press talk up benefit fraud as a distraction from evasion and avoidance.

They do go after tax fraudsters, my bil used to rub his hands in glee after all his detective work and a successful result

There is no need for distraction. As I said upthread, benefits fraud and tax evasion are investigated by totally different agencies. By no means all benefit fraud is committed by desperate people on the breadline, much is committed by people who simply don’t want to work, and your cash in hand window cleaner or gardener is quite likely to be failing to declare all their earnings - it’s not only the wealthy who indulge in tax evasion. (I don’t pay anyone in cash.)

You don’t need ‘expensive’ lawyers or accountants to take advantage of such tax avoidance schemes are available to you, such as saving money in a pension or ISA or inheritance tax planning through legitimate lifetime gifts, or maybe a trust. Nor do you have to be wealthy. When making a will, as we all should, a solicitor will give appropriate advice.

Although relatively few are actually taken to court a great many penalties are imposed by IR, Zahawi is an example, in most cases HMRC impose a penalty and it’s up to you to prove them wrong.

You are automatically guilty, so only fools mess with Tax or Customs affairs