I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
Every body you ring now such as banks, BT. DVLA passport office etc etc etc take that long as most of the staff WFH.
When I need to make an essential call to business as above I give up 3 hours of my day just in case.
Last time I spoke to HMRC the woman although extremely helpful had our call interrupted cos she needed to let her dog in and out to go for a crap.
You should be able to check your NI contributions/qualifying years online if you have a government gateway account. I can see mine, shows I will get the full state pension despite about 7 years of opting out of SERPS, mainly because despite that I have the full qualifying years.
I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
Every body you ring now such as banks, BT. DVLA passport office etc etc etc take that long as most of the staff WFH.
When I need to make an essential call to business as above I give up 3 hours of my day just in case.
Last time I spoke to HMRC the woman although extremely helpful had our call interrupted cos she needed to let her dog in and out to go for a crap.
That is not the reason. More likely staffing cut to the bone.
WFH actually means more opportunity to extend hours better cater for some interruptions that occur anywhere. Technology allows this and staff will be monitored. But if bosses won’t pay for the right number of staff or quality….
I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
I find being invited to ‘go to the appliance’ or visit the website or check online very annoying indeed. Such places often seem to me to be set up by people who assume some parts of their process ought to be ‘obvious’ when they’re not. As for passwords, upper case, lower case, use a number, use an unusual character, use a minimum/maximum number of items, answer security questions, know your personal code or number. You end up with so much navigating is frustrating enough to make you give up. I always pursue the phone menu until you get to a person, and if on hold you can put the telephone on speaker and do something else until the music stops and you are answered.
I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
Every body you ring now such as banks, BT. DVLA passport office etc etc etc take that long as most of the staff WFH.
When I need to make an essential call to business as above I give up 3 hours of my day just in case.
Last time I spoke to HMRC the woman although extremely helpful had our call interrupted cos she needed to let her dog in and out to go for a crap.
That is not the reason. More likely staffing cut to the bone.
WFH actually means more opportunity to extend hours better cater for some interruptions that occur anywhere. Technology allows this and staff will be monitored. But if bosses won’t pay for the right number of staff or quality….
It is one of the reasons.
. I know dozens of people working from home and when pressed admit they don't do as much.
My sister works for BT and has worked from home since covid. I talk to her everyday during the day. I couldn't when she worked in an office.
Also where are the quality of staff coming from. You learn your trade etc in a work environment not in your living room.
I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
Every body you ring now such as banks, BT. DVLA passport office etc etc etc take that long as most of the staff WFH.
When I need to make an essential call to business as above I give up 3 hours of my day just in case.
Last time I spoke to HMRC the woman although extremely helpful had our call interrupted cos she needed to let her dog in and out to go for a crap.
That is not the reason. More likely staffing cut to the bone.
WFH actually means more opportunity to extend hours better cater for some interruptions that occur anywhere. Technology allows this and staff will be monitored. But if bosses won’t pay for the right number of staff or quality….
It is one of the reasons.
. I know dozens of people working from home and when pressed admit they don't do as much.
My sister works for BT and has worked from home since covid. I talk to her everyday during the day. I couldn't when she worked in an office.
Also where are the quality of staff coming from. You learn your trade etc in a work environment not in your living room.
I was only commenting that WFH is not necessarily or automatically why queue times are longer which you suggested.
WFH has both advantages and disadvantages. A hybrid model is likely best.
When I started work in Westminster in 1972 there was a tax office in Victoria where you could walk in and wait for face to face advice at the counter. Problems sorted on the spot.
I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
Every body you ring now such as banks, BT. DVLA passport office etc etc etc take that long as most of the staff WFH.
When I need to make an essential call to business as above I give up 3 hours of my day just in case.
Last time I spoke to HMRC the woman although extremely helpful had our call interrupted cos she needed to let her dog in and out to go for a crap.
That is not the reason. More likely staffing cut to the bone.
WFH actually means more opportunity to extend hours better cater for some interruptions that occur anywhere. Technology allows this and staff will be monitored. But if bosses won’t pay for the right number of staff or quality….
It is one of the reasons.
. I know dozens of people working from home and when pressed admit they don't do as much.
My sister works for BT and has worked from home since covid. I talk to her everyday during the day. I couldn't when she worked in an office.
Also where are the quality of staff coming from. You learn your trade etc in a work environment not in your living room.
I don't know anyone who does less work when WFH
I do, however know dozens who embrace the flexibility WFH has given them and their employers.
I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
Every body you ring now such as banks, BT. DVLA passport office etc etc etc take that long as most of the staff WFH.
When I need to make an essential call to business as above I give up 3 hours of my day just in case.
Last time I spoke to HMRC the woman although extremely helpful had our call interrupted cos she needed to let her dog in and out to go for a crap.
That is not the reason. More likely staffing cut to the bone.
WFH actually means more opportunity to extend hours better cater for some interruptions that occur anywhere. Technology allows this and staff will be monitored. But if bosses won’t pay for the right number of staff or quality….
It is one of the reasons.
. I know dozens of people working from home and when pressed admit they don't do as much.
My sister works for BT and has worked from home since covid. I talk to her everyday during the day. I couldn't when she worked in an office.
Also where are the quality of staff coming from. You learn your trade etc in a work environment not in your living room.
I know dozens of people who do work hard from home.
The decline in quality of calls from businesses is not down to work from home culture. Places like banks and electricity suppliers were a nightmare to get hold of on the phone way before wfh increased.
It's a lazy narrative to blame wfh culture as a reason. I've worked with plenty of people in offices over the years who don't do much in the office.
I find it's the people who cannot work from home that criticise it the most, probably because they are jealous that they can't.
I now work part time, with one day per week in the office and two at home. The days I work at home I get far more done than the day I am in the office. My set up at home is exactly the same as in the office. I am far less stressed working at home than I am when I have to drive to work.
I take phone calls at home and the system is internet based so there is no delay in answering. If companies do have a delay in answering calls, then it is far more likely to be lack of staff than people being away from their desks.
Made the mistake of ringing HMRC from my desk phone and I had to get a colleague to sit at my desk while i took a pee. Then while i went to get a coffee. Always call from my mobile now.
You should be able to check your NI contributions/qualifying years online if you have a government gateway account. I can see mine, shows I will get the full state pension despite about 7 years of opting out of SERPS, mainly because despite that I have the full qualifying years.
You can check online, but you can't add. Before my wife retired she was short (checked online). Then to add backdate NI contributions I had to ring 2 different numbers. Firstly a rather labourious call to call to agree the amount amount (even though I had been able to calculate on line very quickly, this person took ages) and then had to ring a second number to be able to pay. What a total waste of everybody's time!
Made the mistake of ringing HMRC from my desk phone and I had to get a colleague to sit at my desk while i took a pee. Then while i went to get a coffee. Always call from my mobile now.
So if they answer you can talk to them whilst having a dump? Nice - that's proper multi-tasking! ;-)
When I started work in Westminster in 1972 there was a tax office in Victoria where you could walk in and wait for face to face advice at the counter. Problems sorted on the spot.
So much easier than call centres,
When I started working for HMC&E back in the late 80s they had 5 VAT offices just covering central London - City (Gresham Street), Holborn, Euston, West End (Shaftesbury Avenue) and Westminster. They also had a ring of offices covering outer London, at places like Stratford, Orpington, Croydon, Hammersmith, Finchley, Ealing, etc.
Every office had it's own enquiry team which would deal with phonecalls and personal callers - no appointment necessary, just walk in and someone would come out to see you.
Now that's utterly bonkers, just in terms of the cost of renting and running that many offices alone, but then to have so many people in such a small area all doing essentially the same thing and duplicating work was mental. So it was ripe for change.
Fast forward 30 years and now you can't even get to speak to one on the phone, let alone face to face. And the levels of incompetence when you do eventually get to speak to someone is absolutely staggering.
And in that time the "tax gap" has gone up to £35 billion per year!
I find it's the people who cannot work from home that criticise it the most, probably because they are jealous that they can't.
I now work part time, with one day per week in the office and two at home. The days I work at home I get far more done than the day I am in the office. My set up at home is exactly the same as in the office. I am far less stressed working at home than I am when I have to drive to work.
I take phone calls at home and the system is internet based so there is no delay in answering. If companies do have a delay in answering calls, then it is far more likely to be lack of staff than people being away from their desks.
US banking giant Wells Fargo has sacked a number of employees following claims that staff were faking keyboard activity to fool the company into thinking they were working when they were not.
It is not yet clear how the issue was discovered or whether it was specifically related to people working from home.
The US bank said staff had been fired or resigned "after review of allegations involving simulation of keyboard activity creating impression of active work".
New rules recently came into effect in the US which mean that brokers working from home must be inspected every three years.
When I started work in Westminster in 1972 there was a tax office in Victoria where you could walk in and wait for face to face advice at the counter. Problems sorted on the spot.
So much easier than call centres,
When I started working for HMC&E back in the late 80s they had 5 VAT offices just covering central London - City (Gresham Street), Holborn, Euston, West End (Shaftesbury Avenue) and Westminster. They also had a ring of offices covering outer London, at places like Stratford, Orpington, Croydon, Hammersmith, Finchley, Ealing, etc.
Every office had it's own enquiry team which would deal with phonecalls and personal callers - no appointment necessary, just walk in and someone would come out to see you.
Now that's utterly bonkers, just in terms of the cost of renting and running that many offices alone, but then to have so many people in such a small area all doing essentially the same thing and duplicating work was mental. So it was ripe for change.
Fast forward 30 years and now you can't even get to speak to one on the phone, let alone face to face. And the levels of incompetence when you do eventually get to speak to someone is absolutely staggering.
And in that time the "tax gap" has gone up to £35 billion per year!
Thanks for posting this. I found it very informative and put a lot of things into context which are often talked about without any backing or detail. Three especially interesting points
1. "What does history tell us about the record of past governments at reducing the tax gap? They’ve not done too badly. (over 20 years)"
2. "So, can the tax gap be reduced further? Probably – though the law of diminishing returns may mean further marginal gains are becoming harder to come by. Ambitious targets are to be applauded but our advice to politicians of all parties is not to spend the money before it’s been collected."
3. "How would you reduce it?
As noted above almost half the tax gap (£16 billion) is now taxpayer mistakes (error and carelessness). The next government should:
Help wannabe-compliant taxpayers to be compliant by investing in HMRC customer service so they can get answers to their queries
Focus on simplification – a simpler tax system, with clear rules and easy to navigate guidance would lead to fewer mistakes by both taxpayers and tax authorities
Invest in digitalising the tax system but review the process to focus it more on the needs of taxpayers"
When I started work in Westminster in 1972 there was a tax office in Victoria where you could walk in and wait for face to face advice at the counter. Problems sorted on the spot.
So much easier than call centres,
When I started working for HMC&E back in the late 80s they had 5 VAT offices just covering central London - City (Gresham Street), Holborn, Euston, West End (Shaftesbury Avenue) and Westminster. They also had a ring of offices covering outer London, at places like Stratford, Orpington, Croydon, Hammersmith, Finchley, Ealing, etc.
Every office had it's own enquiry team which would deal with phonecalls and personal callers - no appointment necessary, just walk in and someone would come out to see you.
Now that's utterly bonkers, just in terms of the cost of renting and running that many offices alone, but then to have so many people in such a small area all doing essentially the same thing and duplicating work was mental. So it was ripe for change.
Fast forward 30 years and now you can't even get to speak to one on the phone, let alone face to face. And the levels of incompetence when you do eventually get to speak to someone is absolutely staggering.
And in that time the "tax gap" has gone up to £35 billion per year!
Thanks for posting this. I found it very informative and put a lot of things into context which are often talked about without any backing or detail. Three especially interesting points
1. "What does history tell us about the record of past governments at reducing the tax gap? They’ve not done too badly. (over 20 years)"
2. "So, can the tax gap be reduced further? Probably – though the law of diminishing returns may mean further marginal gains are becoming harder to come by. Ambitious targets are to be applauded but our advice to politicians of all parties is not to spend the money before it’s been collected."
3. "How would you reduce it?
As noted above almost half the tax gap (£16 billion) is now taxpayer mistakes (error and carelessness). The next government should:
Help wannabe-compliant taxpayers to be compliant by investing in HMRC customer service so they can get answers to their queries
Focus on simplification – a simpler tax system, with clear rules and easy to navigate guidance would lead to fewer mistakes by both taxpayers and tax authorities
Invest in digitalising the tax system but review the process to focus it more on the needs of taxpayers"
Yes, I found it really informative too.
We hear various people going on about "tax avoidance", and while £1.4 billion is certainly not to be sneezed at , it's not the huge hole in the finances or cash cow that some seem to think it is. HMRC's own figures prove this - albeit I think these can be taken with a large dose of scepticism, because it's HMRC marking their own homework after all!
I find it's the people who cannot work from home that criticise it the most, probably because they are jealous that they can't.
I now work part time, with one day per week in the office and two at home. The days I work at home I get far more done than the day I am in the office. My set up at home is exactly the same as in the office. I am far less stressed working at home than I am when I have to drive to work.
I take phone calls at home and the system is internet based so there is no delay in answering. If companies do have a delay in answering calls, then it is far more likely to be lack of staff than people being away from their desks.
You should be able to check your NI contributions/qualifying years online if you have a government gateway account. I can see mine, shows I will get the full state pension despite about 7 years of opting out of SERPS, mainly because despite that I have the full qualifying years.
Yes I did that, but I had a shortfall and computer said no & told me to phone as it wasn't possible to deal with online.
I had to phone HMRC today re my NI contributions required to get a full state pension. I followed the online procedure, but it then said I had to phone up. It asked me if I wanted to speak to someone in English, which in some ways is good, but it's also a bit of a wtf moment. I was on hold for over an hour before they answered.
You should be able to check your NI contributions/qualifying years online if you have a government gateway account. I can see mine, shows I will get the full state pension despite about 7 years of opting out of SERPS, mainly because despite that I have the full qualifying years.
You can check online, but you can't add. Before my wife retired she was short (checked online). Then to add backdate NI contributions I had to ring 2 different numbers. Firstly a rather labourious call to call to agree the amount amount (even though I had been able to calculate on line very quickly, this person took ages) and then had to ring a second number to be able to pay. What a total waste of everybody's time!
When I started work in Westminster in 1972 there was a tax office in Victoria where you could walk in and wait for face to face advice at the counter. Problems sorted on the spot.
So much easier than call centres,
When I started working for HMC&E back in the late 80s they had 5 VAT offices just covering central London - City (Gresham Street), Holborn, Euston, West End (Shaftesbury Avenue) and Westminster. They also had a ring of offices covering outer London, at places like Stratford, Orpington, Croydon, Hammersmith, Finchley, Ealing, etc.
Every office had it's own enquiry team which would deal with phonecalls and personal callers - no appointment necessary, just walk in and someone would come out to see you.
Now that's utterly bonkers, just in terms of the cost of renting and running that many offices alone, but then to have so many people in such a small area all doing essentially the same thing and duplicating work was mental. So it was ripe for change.
Fast forward 30 years and now you can't even get to speak to one on the phone, let alone face to face. And the levels of incompetence when you do eventually get to speak to someone is absolutely staggering.
And in that time the "tax gap" has gone up to £35 billion per year!
Thanks for posting this. I found it very informative and put a lot of things into context which are often talked about without any backing or detail. Three especially interesting points
1. "What does history tell us about the record of past governments at reducing the tax gap? They’ve not done too badly. (over 20 years)"
2. "So, can the tax gap be reduced further? Probably – though the law of diminishing returns may mean further marginal gains are becoming harder to come by. Ambitious targets are to be applauded but our advice to politicians of all parties is not to spend the money before it’s been collected."
3. "How would you reduce it?
As noted above almost half the tax gap (£16 billion) is now taxpayer mistakes (error and carelessness). The next government should:
Help wannabe-compliant taxpayers to be compliant by investing in HMRC customer service so they can get answers to their queries
Focus on simplification – a simpler tax system, with clear rules and easy to navigate guidance would lead to fewer mistakes by both taxpayers and tax authorities
Invest in digitalising the tax system but review the process to focus it more on the needs of taxpayers"
Yes, I found it really informative too.
We hear various people going on about "tax avoidance", and while £1.4 billion is certainly not to be sneezed at , it's not the huge hole in the finances or cash cow that some seem to think it is. HMRC's own figures prove this - albeit I think these can be taken with a large dose of scepticism, because it's HMRC marking their own homework after all!
In quoting that relatively small figure, HMRC is ignoring the elephant in the room, the global corporate giants who - in the case of what were dubbed the FAANGS - HMRC are simply unable to challenge, due to lack of resource, and also political unwillingness to do so. However if we go back to the case that first made me realise the scale of the problem, there are figures available. I’m talking about the Vodafone case way back in 2009, which was uncovered a couple of years later: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-16253205
Well worth reading. £6bn in disputed tax payments written off over dinner, and the subsequent MP Select Committee claiming that the amount owed by big corporations at that time might be £25bn. 15 years ago, and before Google and Facebook had even warmed up.
2017 legislation gave HMRC powers to go after organisations that facilitate tax evasion. In five years Zero companies have been prosecuted.
HMRC given powers but no resources. The law might be in HMRC's favour but nothing else is. All the brainy tax avoidance creatives work for the industries, not the authorities, because the politicians don't bite the hands that feed. "Aggressive" tax avoidance usually starts out within the letter of the law at the time, cynically exploiting the merest hint of a loophole or gap or interpretation. See Sky TV, Starbucks, Amazon etc etc. So when the gaps get closed, even if the revision is retrospective, the initial conduct rarely if ever falls outside the prevailing legislation at the time of the 'breach'. "Failure to prosecute" makes for a punchy headline with which to berate the tax authorities but it is over simplistic to the point of redundancy.
2017 legislation gave HMRC powers to go after organisations that facilitate tax evasion. In five years Zero companies have been prosecuted.
HMRC given powers but no resources. The law might be in HMRC's favour but nothing else is. All the brainy tax avoidance creatives work for the industries, not the authorities, because the politicians don't bite the hands that feed. "Aggressive" tax avoidance usually starts out within the letter of the law at the time, cynically exploiting the merest hint of a loophole or gap or interpretation. See Sky TV, Starbucks, Amazon etc etc. So when the gaps get closed, even if the revision is retrospective, the initial conduct rarely if ever falls outside the prevailing legislation at the time of the 'breach'. "Failure to prosecute" makes for a punchy headline with which to berate the tax authorities but it is over simplistic to the point of redundancy.
Rishi has earmarked £6bn of tax cuts to be funded by clamping down on avoidance. As you say, cant be done without resources. Doesnt mention past Covid tax fraud. Written off?
2017 legislation gave HMRC powers to go after organisations that facilitate tax evasion. In five years Zero companies have been prosecuted.
HMRC given powers but no resources. The law might be in HMRC's favour but nothing else is. All the brainy tax avoidance creatives work for the industries, not the authorities, because the politicians don't bite the hands that feed. "Aggressive" tax avoidance usually starts out within the letter of the law at the time, cynically exploiting the merest hint of a loophole or gap or interpretation. See Sky TV, Starbucks, Amazon etc etc. So when the gaps get closed, even if the revision is retrospective, the initial conduct rarely if ever falls outside the prevailing legislation at the time of the 'breach'. "Failure to prosecute" makes for a punchy headline with which to berate the tax authorities but it is over simplistic to the point of redundancy.
Rishi has earmarked £6bn of tax cuts to be funded by clamping down on avoidance. As you say, cant be done without resources. Doesnt mention past Covid tax fraud. Written off?
What is Covid tax fraud?
Do you mean the lowlifes who claimed benefits / loans they should not rather than tax?
I have sympathy with the government on this. Almost impossible to roll out a scheme at no notice that doesn’t have flaws. Sadly our fellow citizens took what they should not in some cases. Claiming back no doubt difficult practically. You only write off what becomes uneconomic to get back.
2017 legislation gave HMRC powers to go after organisations that facilitate tax evasion. In five years Zero companies have been prosecuted.
HMRC given powers but no resources. The law might be in HMRC's favour but nothing else is. All the brainy tax avoidance creatives work for the industries, not the authorities, because the politicians don't bite the hands that feed. "Aggressive" tax avoidance usually starts out within the letter of the law at the time, cynically exploiting the merest hint of a loophole or gap or interpretation. See Sky TV, Starbucks, Amazon etc etc. So when the gaps get closed, even if the revision is retrospective, the initial conduct rarely if ever falls outside the prevailing legislation at the time of the 'breach'. "Failure to prosecute" makes for a punchy headline with which to berate the tax authorities but it is over simplistic to the point of redundancy.
Rishi has earmarked £6bn of tax cuts to be funded by clamping down on avoidance. As you say, cant be done without resources. Doesnt mention past Covid tax fraud. Written off?
2017 legislation gave HMRC powers to go after organisations that facilitate tax evasion. In five years Zero companies have been prosecuted.
HMRC given powers but no resources. The law might be in HMRC's favour but nothing else is. All the brainy tax avoidance creatives work for the industries, not the authorities, because the politicians don't bite the hands that feed. "Aggressive" tax avoidance usually starts out within the letter of the law at the time, cynically exploiting the merest hint of a loophole or gap or interpretation. See Sky TV, Starbucks, Amazon etc etc. So when the gaps get closed, even if the revision is retrospective, the initial conduct rarely if ever falls outside the prevailing legislation at the time of the 'breach'. "Failure to prosecute" makes for a punchy headline with which to berate the tax authorities but it is over simplistic to the point of redundancy.
Rishi has earmarked £6bn of tax cuts to be funded by clamping down on avoidance. As you say, cant be done without resources. Doesnt mention past Covid tax fraud. Written off?
What is Covid tax fraud?
Do you mean the lowlifes who claimed benefits / loans they should not rather than tax?
I have sympathy with the government on this. Almost impossible to roll out a scheme at no notice that doesn’t have flaws. Sadly our fellow citizens took what they should not in some cases. Claiming back no doubt difficult practically. You only write off what becomes uneconomic to get back.
The VIP lane for mates of the Tories to provide ppe for our frontline workers who put their lives on the line. Most of the ppe wasn't fit for purpose and has cost the tax payer millions of pounds to buy, store and destroy.
Companies with a record of ppe procurement were overlooked in favour if Tory mates.
Some of those should be in jail for profiteering at the expense of the workers health.
2017 legislation gave HMRC powers to go after organisations that facilitate tax evasion. In five years Zero companies have been prosecuted.
HMRC given powers but no resources. The law might be in HMRC's favour but nothing else is. All the brainy tax avoidance creatives work for the industries, not the authorities, because the politicians don't bite the hands that feed. "Aggressive" tax avoidance usually starts out within the letter of the law at the time, cynically exploiting the merest hint of a loophole or gap or interpretation. See Sky TV, Starbucks, Amazon etc etc. So when the gaps get closed, even if the revision is retrospective, the initial conduct rarely if ever falls outside the prevailing legislation at the time of the 'breach'. "Failure to prosecute" makes for a punchy headline with which to berate the tax authorities but it is over simplistic to the point of redundancy.
Rishi has earmarked £6bn of tax cuts to be funded by clamping down on avoidance. As you say, cant be done without resources. Doesnt mention past Covid tax fraud. Written off?
What is Covid tax fraud?
Do you mean the lowlifes who claimed benefits / loans they should not rather than tax?
I have sympathy with the government on this. Almost impossible to roll out a scheme at no notice that doesn’t have flaws. Sadly our fellow citizens took what they should not in some cases. Claiming back no doubt difficult practically. You only write off what becomes uneconomic to get back.
No. Various individuals registered new companies, or revived dormant ones, took advantage of generic addresses for directors and invented companies with employees to receive furlow payments, or had a sudden mock recruitment drive with no CA5403s issued. Given the whole shebang was run by HMRC who had records of all companies/employees currently paying tax, there was no cross-checking. It is relatively easy to chase down these shysters, as they are named directors and the addresses of convenience (accountants, lawyers) can be threatened with conspiracy to defraud if they dont give up real whereabouts.
However the Tories seem to have no motivation to chase billions of taxpayers stolen money. It might show up their poor management of the crisis.
Comments
When I need to make an essential call to business as above I give up 3 hours of my day just in case.
Last time I spoke to HMRC the woman although extremely helpful had our call interrupted cos she needed to let her dog in and out to go for a crap.
Check your State Pension forecast
Use this service to find out:
- how much State Pension you could get
- when you can get it
- how to increase it, if you can
https://www.gov.uk/check-state-pensionI did a few months ago, it answered my question without any phone calls.
Such places often seem to me to be set up by people who assume some parts of their process ought to be ‘obvious’ when they’re not.
As for passwords, upper case, lower case, use a number, use an unusual character, use a minimum/maximum number of items, answer security questions, know your personal code or number.
You end up with so much navigating is frustrating enough to make you give up.
I always pursue the phone menu until you get to a person, and if on hold you can put the telephone on speaker and do something else until the music stops and you are answered.
. I know dozens of people working from home and when pressed admit they don't do as much.
My sister works for BT and has worked from home since covid. I talk to her everyday during the day. I couldn't when she worked in an office.
Also where are the quality of staff coming from. You learn your trade etc in a work environment not in your living room.
So much easier than call centres,
I do, however know dozens who embrace the flexibility WFH has given them and their employers.
I now work part time, with one day per week in the office and two at home. The days I work at home I get far more done than the day I am in the office. My set up at home is exactly the same as in the office. I am far less stressed working at home than I am when I have to drive to work.
I take phone calls at home and the system is internet based so there is no delay in answering. If companies do have a delay in answering calls, then it is far more likely to be lack of staff than people being away from their desks.
So if they answer you can talk to them whilst having a dump? Nice - that's proper multi-tasking!
;-)
Every office had it's own enquiry team which would deal with phonecalls and personal callers - no appointment necessary, just walk in and someone would come out to see you.
Now that's utterly bonkers, just in terms of the cost of renting and running that many offices alone, but then to have so many people in such a small area all doing essentially the same thing and duplicating work was mental. So it was ripe for change.
Fast forward 30 years and now you can't even get to speak to one on the phone, let alone face to face. And the levels of incompetence when you do eventually get to speak to someone is absolutely staggering.
And in that time the "tax gap" has gone up to £35 billion per year!
https://www.tax.org.uk/tax-avoidance-tax-gap-explainer
US banking giant Wells Fargo has sacked a number of employees following claims that staff were faking keyboard activity to fool the company into thinking they were working when they were not.
It is not yet clear how the issue was discovered or whether it was specifically related to people working from home.
The US bank said staff had been fired or resigned "after review of allegations involving simulation of keyboard activity creating impression of active work".
New rules recently came into effect in the US which mean that brokers working from home must be inspected every three years.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjll01220yeo
Three especially interesting points
1. "What does history tell us about the record of past governments at reducing the tax gap? They’ve not done too badly. (over 20 years)"
2. "So, can the tax gap be reduced further? Probably – though the law of diminishing returns may mean further marginal gains are becoming harder to come by. Ambitious targets are to be applauded but our advice to politicians of all parties is not to spend the money before it’s been collected."
3. "How would you reduce it?
As noted above almost half the tax gap (£16 billion) is now taxpayer mistakes (error and carelessness). The next government should:
We hear various people going on about "tax avoidance", and while £1.4 billion is certainly not to be sneezed at , it's not the huge hole in the finances or cash cow that some seem to think it is. HMRC's own figures prove this - albeit I think these can be taken with a large dose of scepticism, because it's HMRC marking their own homework after all!
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-16253205
All the brainy tax avoidance creatives work for the industries, not the authorities, because the politicians don't bite the hands that feed.
"Aggressive" tax avoidance usually starts out within the letter of the law at the time, cynically exploiting the merest hint of a loophole or gap or interpretation. See Sky TV, Starbucks, Amazon etc etc.
So when the gaps get closed, even if the revision is retrospective, the initial conduct rarely if ever falls outside the prevailing legislation at the time of the 'breach'.
"Failure to prosecute" makes for a punchy headline with which to berate the tax authorities but it is over simplistic to the point of redundancy.
Do you mean the lowlifes who claimed benefits / loans they should not rather than tax?
Companies with a record of ppe procurement were overlooked in favour if Tory mates.
Some of those should be in jail for profiteering at the expense of the workers health.
However the Tories seem to have no motivation to chase billions of taxpayers stolen money. It might show up their poor management of the crisis.