Going after the economically disadvantaged!

MerylStreep

spabbygirl

The EU has been clamping down on tax evasion, I think that's why the Tories wanted out of the EU, since most of them are wealthy enough to loose money because of it.
www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/02/eu-agrees-to-force-multinationals-to-disclose-tax-piling-pressure-on-uk

It’s a shame they didn’t clamp down on Jean Claude Juncker whe he was President and Finance minister for Luxembourg, therefore giving him the opportunity to give Amazon and others those obscene tax breaks.

www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/economy/20170529STO76260/juncker-don-t-measure-my-credibility-on-the-basis-of-my-tax-past

This is not an article about individuals, is it? It's about where large companies pay their tax.

The DWP don’t always get it right re fraud. My DS has learning difficulties, and six months after DH died, DS received a small pension from DH’s employer backdated to the month of his death. I immediately sent a copy of the letter to the DWP to which they replied, informing me of a lower amount of benefits for my son. Fair enough. About a year later, I received a letter informing me that I didn’t tell them that the pension was backdated, and that I was now due them money to cover the six months difference in the benefits amounts. I did not like the accusatory tone of the letter. I had informed them the minute that I myself knew about it, and the copy of the letter that I sent would have told them that if they’d read it properly. I let them know in no uncertain terms that I certainly wasn’t trying to cheat them. Needless to say, I didn’t get a reply.

I suspect that we may be comparing apples with oranges here. Yes, all fraud is illegal, but some forms of it are not only more easily detectable, but are also much cheaper to investigate, to prosecute, and to achieve closure/recompense. Tax fraud can be extremely complex to unravel, and requires highly qualified and highly paid Forensic Investigative Accountants to reveal it. Benefit fraud is a much softer target, so is potentially a more attractive option to investigate both in terms of human resources and economics. I'm not suggesting that this is morally defensible, as one could argue that a significant amount of benefit fraud may be driven by poverty and desperation, whereas tax fraud is almost always a matter of sheer greed. Softer targets are preferred, I guess.

NanaDana

I suspect that we may be comparing apples with oranges here. Yes, all fraud is illegal, but some forms of it are not only more easily detectable, but are also much cheaper to investigate, to prosecute, and to achieve closure/recompense. Tax fraud can be extremely complex to unravel, and requires highly qualified and highly paid Forensic Investigative Accountants to reveal it. Benefit fraud is a much softer target, so is potentially a more attractive option to investigate both in terms of human resources and economics. I'm not suggesting that this is morally defensible, as one could argue that a significant amount of benefit fraud may be driven by poverty and desperation, whereas tax fraud is almost always a matter of sheer greed. Softer targets are preferred, I guess.

I would add to your penultimate sentence NanaDana, the issue with anxiety. Many benefit claims are far, far more complex than the average tax return and have to be made by people already weighed down by intolerable pressures. Anxiety closes down the ability to think and a lack of agency closes down the ability to act for your own good. It is no surprise that errors are made.

It’s the age old prejudice going after the easy target, and Victorian attitude that the poor deserve their lot because they are lazy - regardless of how hard they work. No-one actually knows how the amount ‘the law says you need to live on’ is calculated, but it is certain that a defined calculation of real costs of living would raise the £85 pw benefit to £158 pw.
It is wrong to claim more benefit than ‘the law says you need to live on’ but the pressure on working parents who have to skip meals to feed their children is understandable. It is also a system that forces unmarried parents to live apart because benefits for single parents are more thaan for a couple living together. The whole country would benefit from chasing tax from wealthy people, but the likes of Nadim Zahawi have an inbuilt resistance to paying what is due. The richer they are the greedier they get. Alas the status quo will never be addressed because Parliament and the House of Lords are stuffed full of greedy people who see no reason why they should be required to pay taxes as the rest of the population have to.

Perhaps you could name a few? I assume you’re talking about people who evade tax, given that methods of tax avoidance are available to everyone as I have already said.

Daisy Anne

I only retired last October, and my daughter currently works for the fraud department at DWP so I can assure you my experiences are not “out of date”

To the poster who’s nice worked for DWP and heard “heartbreaking stories” yes many many people are in awful vulnerable situations, DWP are is not made up from evil entities intent on making the poor poorer - perhaps the ministers are way out of touch and they do make terrible and flawed policy, but in my 13 years of working at DWP I met many caring honest staff who’s only intent was to help people. I too heard many heartbreaking cases and stories, and sadly in a small number of cases, “stories” were exactly what they were.

Rightly or wrongly our mantra was “those who can take up paid work, should do so, those who cannot (not will not) should be properly cared for”

Niece not nice !! Grrrr

but are also much cheaper to investigate, to prosecute, and to achieve closure/recompense

Tax fraud involves far greater amounts than does benefit fraud and is far more cost effective to pursue. The problem is finding the money and personnel to pursue it in the first place.

Cossy A good post. DWP staff are hard working people who try to do their best for their customers. Of course you get the odd exception as you do in all areas of work.

A lot of high value tax fraud never gets publicized because the culprit pays the penalty, the cost of fighting the taxman is very high, you have to prove him wrong.

Absolutely right Katie. Because it’s rarely publicised people think it doesn’t happen.

Germanshepherdsmum

Tax avoidance is not a crime.

Tax evasion is!

Of course. But not avoidance.

Dinahmo

spabbygirl

The EU has been clamping down on tax evasion, I think that's why the Tories wanted out of the EU, since most of them are wealthy enough to loose money because of it.
www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/02/eu-agrees-to-force-multinationals-to-disclose-tax-piling-pressure-on-uk

You're right and many of us have been pointing this out for longer than I care to remember. Unfortunately too m any people get their info from the right wing, foreign owned media.

It’s not all as squeaky clean as it looks.

www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/06/25/did-the-eus-attempt-to-name-and-shame-tax-havens-into-behaving-better-work/

Germanshepherdsmum

Of course. But not avoidance.

The line is not always clearly demarcated.

If it’s not an approved avoidance scheme it’s evasion.

Quokka

Germanshepherdsmum

Of course. But not avoidance.

The line is not always clearly demarcated.

It is quite clear. The sophisticated schemes used by the ultra wealthy are complicated but for most of us it is clear.

You declare your income. If you have income that's not taxed at source then you must declare it, unless it's exempt, like ISAs.

You claim your expenses. You should keep receipts to back them up, unless it's clear on your bank statements.

If you're not sure, get advice.

Rishi Sunak has just published his tax return. He has paid all the tax that is due. And he has paid far more tax than anyone on this forum. Are we of the opinion that everything that we earn is the property of the state. And we should be grateful if they let us keep a bit if it. Or would we rather encourage enterprise and a work ethic.

Perhaps they could try and try and track down some of the money lost (£4.5 billion), with Covid fraud/scams/dodgy contracts?

That would help.

DWP fraud is wrong, but there are bigger fish to fry.🤔

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64304428

The Covid compensation enabled many companies to make the first profit for many years - by doing nothing. I know several pubs that took the money closed the doors, paid off any loans and walked away, other marginal businesses did the same.

It was bound to happen but to help the majority a minority was going to take advantage, that always happens. If it is true that Covid cost £310bn and £4.5bn was fraud it’s 1.5% that’s quite good.

Perhaps they could try and try and track down some of the money lost (£4.5 billion), with Covid fraud/scams/dodgy contracts?

Not sure where you got this figure from, DiamondLily, but I think it's vastly understated.

For example from the BMJ,

News Covid-19: Government writes off £10bn on unusable, overpriced, or undelivered PPE

www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o296

We know, as you say, that the government entered into some very dodgy contracts for PPE, its 'VIP' lane for fast tracking firms connected to MPs' friends, relations and donors, has been judged to be unlawful, and that that was a prime source of the dodgy PPE, so I think that, as evidence of government corruption, this figure could well be included in the 'fraud' figure.

Then there is this:

Data from government departments’ annual reports suggested fraud and error losses of between £12.4bn and £20.1bn, with a central estimate of £15.7bn, the report said.

The government will also have to write off £21bn in loans to people or businesses who will be unable to pay them back.

www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/23/uk-lost-up-to-16bn-due-to-and-error-in-covid-loans-schemes

That's without the £37billion allocated to Test & Trace that never seems to have been fully accounted for.

I think that is considerably more that 1.5%, Katie59

GrannyRose15

Rishi Sunak has just published his tax return. He has paid all the tax that is due. And he has paid far more tax than anyone on this forum. Are we of the opinion that everything that we earn is the property of the state. And we should be grateful if they let us keep a bit if it. Or would we rather encourage enterprise and a work ethic.

He has paid more than anyone else on this forum because he has amassed so much wealth. Much of it grows because he pays a lower percentage in tax than those with much, much lower incomes.

Why is he paying 22% when there is now, over 50% of the country paying 40%? It seems you are one of those who think the wealthy need more money as an incentive to work, but the poorest and those in the middle need to be kept poor or made worse off so that they work. These attitudes from the far-right are quite despicable.

I do not blame the wealthy. I blame the government. It is time we swept the board clean of all tax avoidance measures.

Much of the tax he paid was CGT. He has paid the full rate of tax for earnings and capital gains. Don’t twist the figures to pretend otherwise.

Germanshepherdsmum

Much of the tax he paid was CGT. He has paid the full rate of tax for earnings and capital gains. Don’t twist the figures to pretend otherwise.

That's as may be but why should earnings be taxed more than unearned capital gains? It's not wonder that some people do some work on the black.