HMRC criticised for 'cosy' deals by committee of MPs

[denphone]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16253205

A committee of MPs has criticised "cosy" deals between HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and big businesses over how they settle their tax bills.

The MPs believe there are £25bn of outstanding tax issues with big companies and wants HMRC to be more open in its dealing with large firms.

The committee singled out Dave Hartnett, permanent secretary for tax, for failing to handle tax negotiations with some big companies properly.

The MPs accuse Dave Hartnett of mishandling tax negotiations with some big companies such as Goldman Sachs, letting it off millions of pounds in interest on its tax bill.

Margaret Hodge MP, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said: "This report is a damning indictment of HMRC and the way its senior officials handle tax disputes with large corporations."

The MPs say he:

1/authorised a large tax settlement whose negotiation he had been involved in, breaching HMRC's internal rules

2/had given "imprecise, inconsistent and potentially misleading answers" to MPs

3/had relationships with big companies that were "too cosy", resulting in the appearance they received "preferential treatment"

4/had used a bogus excuse of observing taxpayer confidentiality to avoid explaining the tax deals he had been involved in.



Seems to be one law for them and another for us mere mortals.

[Dai]

And apparently he's retiring next summer. It would be interesting to know what directorships he'll be taking up to fill his time after that.

[Ignitionnet]

See http://www.publications.parliament.u...531/153103.htm

Just the first 3 paragraphs set the tone.

At 31 March 2011 HM Revenue & Customs (the Department) was seeking to resolve tax issues valued at over £25 billion with large companies, some of which included disputes over outstanding tax. The Department must collect as much outstanding tax as possible and be held properly to account for how it resolves tax disputes. We have serious concerns about how the Department handled some cases involving large settlements, where governance arrangements were bypassed or overlooked until it was too late. In some cases the same officials negotiated and approved the settlements, which is clearly unacceptable.

Investigation of these specific cases has led to serious concern about systemic issues which must be addressed with the utmost urgency. There needs to be proper separation between the negotiation of tax settlements and the authorization of such settlements. And the Department must address issues of accountability so that Parliament and the public can be satisfied that best value is secured.

The Department has made matters worse by trying to avoid scrutiny of these settlements and has consistently failed to give straight answers to our questions about specific cases, which has severely hampered our ability to hold it to account for the settlements reached.

[Mr Angry]

Ig,

Watch as HMRC becomes a "deduction at source" model in the not too distant future.

Do people wonder what those occupying St Pauls are angry about...

[chris9991]

It's alright there are no cosy relationships - all taxpayers are equal

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16253205

The Prime Minister's official spokesman also rejected claims of "unduly cosy" relationships.
"They don't get preferential treatment. HMRC support all taxpayers even-handedly," he said.

Certainly applies to taxpayers with Swiss bank accounts....

[Osem]

If/when our MPs have sorted out the 'cosy' relationships they allege HMRC has with certain big businesses perhaps they'll properly scrutinise some of the relationships many of them have with big businesses, directly and via lobbyists.

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by Osem

If/when our MPs have sorted out the 'cosy' relationships they allege HMRC has with certain big businesses perhaps they'll properly scrutinise some of the relationships many of them have with big businesses, directly and via lobbyists.

Well said

[Osem]

Yes well it's been claimed certain HMRC personnel have even been 'wined and dined' by companies. Now I don't suppose anything like that has ever happened amongst our glorious leaders has it.......

[devilincarnate]

They are all on a 90 degree curve? Or am I just saying that they are all bent?

[mertle]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...-pay-more.html

Interesting article in telegraph on this they said equates to £1,000 per household coughs up the money due to the failure to these not paying up.

Now the problem is the chasing if we force them to pay they just tax haven more or hurt the workers and customers.

Think the only way string servere penalties more stringent rulings but then problem these people will threaten to take there companies to some other country.

Sadly these companies not proud to be british they cant be else they would Cough every penny up not cut jobs or pass costs on.

Its about name shame these companies maybe people refuse to deal with them but again we only hurt the workers not the bad apples running the company/owning it.

I dont understand why the blame on one man BOTH LABOUR and Conservatives took head in sand approach. Damn would he got away with it if it was not party policy, I doubt it so beeb naive in reporting it.

They turned blind eye because there business budies told them too else no party coffers for you. There lies issue MP's and Parties should have NO links to businesses whatsoever.

It clouds judgement open to abuse acusation of cash for privaleges/favouritism.

I think Politics must be sought by regulation distance itself from business and media. Elecdtion funding be tightly conducted possible central funded.

Can we do owt knowing the power these companies/individuals hold. Should we go after the accountants make it offence to do it with threat jail. Its an option but can we really afford to go to war with big players.

Sadly the only way these to grow up admit they HURTING the uk.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Ig,

Watch as HMRC becomes a "deduction at source" model in the not too distant future.

Depends, if they can ensure that they stitch us PAYE morons to make up for these guys they won't care less I'm sure.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Depends, if they can ensure that they stitch us PAYE morons to make up for these guys they won't care less I'm sure.

They already "own" the banks. What's not to know?

Originally Posted by mertle

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...-pay-more.html

Interesting article in telegraph on this they said equates to £1,000 per household coughs up the money due to the failure to these not paying up.

Now the problem is the chasing if we force them to pay they just tax haven more or hurt the workers and customers.

Think the only way string servere penalties more stringent rulings but then problem these people will threaten to take there companies to some other country.

Sadly these companies not proud to be british they cant be else they would Cough every penny up not cut jobs or pass costs on.

Its about name shame these companies maybe people refuse to deal with them but again we only hurt the workers not the bad apples running the company/owning it.

I dont understand why the blame on one man BOTH LABOUR and Conservatives took head in sand approach. Damn would he got away with it if it was not party policy, I doubt it so beeb naive in reporting it.

They turned blind eye because there business budies told them too else no party coffers for you. There lies issue MP's and Parties should have NO links to businesses whatsoever.

It clouds judgement open to abuse acusation of cash for privaleges/favouritism.

I think Politics must be sought by regulation distance itself from business and media. Elecdtion funding be tightly conducted possible central funded.

Can we do owt knowing the power these companies/individuals hold. Should we go after the accountants make it offence to do it with threat jail. Its an option but can we really afford to go to war with big players.

Sadly the only way these to grow up admit they HURTING the uk.

Much as it pains me to defend MPs, you do realise you are talking total rubbish?

These acts were carried out by senior Civil Servants at the HMRC, and the issues have been highlighted and publicised by the PAC, which is made up of MPs.

btw, just to bring some facts into the conversation, £25 billion worth of taxes is under discussion/dispute, not has been lost/given away.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Much as it pains me to defend MPs, you do realise you are talking total rubbish?

These acts were carried out by senior Civil Servants at the HMRC, and the issues have been highlighted and publicised by the PAC, which is made up of MPs.

btw, just to bring some facts into the conversation, £25 billion worth of taxes is under discussion/dispute, not has been lost/given away.

Yes Civil servents done it but questions need to be raised.

The telegrapgh reporting that we mortals picking up the shortfall of lost taxes no doubt the austerity more severe due to this failure for these to cough up.

I am also aware it may cost taxpayers lots chasing up the dirty swines and they know hefty court cases not good.

The other do you think MP's under pressure at present to come clean so the situation dictated finally investigate. They not going to admit they was behind the favouritism are they.

Why NOW as MP's before never shown any resolve to sort the issue to me speaks volumes when this gone on best part 30 years.

Clearly its gone on far too long why Both LABOUR and conservative ignored it. Its just at present political climate on scrutiny watch something being done. Its very conveniant the man retiring I hope he becomes whistleblower to the whole shady murky affair.

I dont trust MP's one second to be honest they covering there own back hoping the stable door closed before horse has bolted. There clearly more to this than what we being told.