[Politics] HMRC. FIT FOR PURPOSE?

[GT49er]

No, of course it's not. Cut after cut after cut (where cuts weren't beneficial) and no doubt the constant setting of 'objectives', which are often counter-productive, but on one side of the balance sheet save money. Avoid expensive litigation (or words to that effect I've no doubt) would be up there with the most important. So - don't go after the big boys with expensive lawyers - let them get away with it. Concentrate on the little people, easy victims ..... sorry, targets.

That was governement policy in the 1980s and 90s, when I was a civil servant. Anybody care to try and tell me that's changed? Please don't - I could die laughing!

 

[Easy 10]

Its just an archaic organisation. Occasionally in my line of work we have to obtain a certificate of residency from HMRC for an overseas client if they ask for one (basically proof that the business is legitimate and registered as a UK company). For such a simple document you'd think you could email the request to them. NO. You have to write a letter (to a generic address in Glasgow I think), and hope that someone picks it up and deals with it. Usually it takes 4 weeks+ for the certificate to come back, and of course the whole time, as the weeks tick by, you're just hoping its not gone missing into the ether - which it has at times. Phone calls chasing it are a waste of time. Meanwhile we're not getting paid till this certificate arrives and we can pass it on the the client.

Its a tedious, obstructive, slow process and belongs in about 1974.

 

[beorhthelm]

The same profession, my experience is exactly the same, it got noticeably worse from the first lockdown and hasn't improved one iota.
...

adecdata from elsewhere is the situation worsened greatly in 2020. maybe working from home doesnt suit the department?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

As well as a flat rate of income tax lets throw in IHT as well - i.e. it should be scrapped. Why should people who have been frugal while alive been penalised when dead ? If we have to keep IHT then lets simplify it. For example - IHT should be based on the actual SALE amount not some estimate at time of death. An example - I'm currently selling properties that my parents left - valued after a quick look around by estate agents at over £1m. In reality they are likely to achieve ~£800k. Yet I've been forced to pay IHT on the guess by the estate agents. The value has dropped in part due to HMRC taking months (12+) to issue probate, that idiot Truss and of course the common 'but the survey has shown this'. Yet HMRC are carrying out an investigation claiming too little IHT has been paid. Utter wankers - makes me understand why some try and evade paying the correct tax.

Yep. Tax as you earn and tax as you buy things. Both parties need to stop using tax as a bribe or part of their culture war. It won't happen, though. Not until the influence of shit newspapers has gone. That said....we are heading towards the latter. After all, nobody who reads the Mail or Mirror are more likely to vote tory or labour on the basis of vituperative criticism of the tax plans of the party they have never and would never vote for, and only old people buy newspapers (I don't, because I'm still young).

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Wouldn't that lead to hugely less tax being received?

No.

But, as you probably know, increasing the rate of tax reduces the tax take (apparently because British Talent moves abroad, and British wealth makers chose to create less wealth in order to take advantage of whatever wheezey tax loopholes exist).

On the other hand, reducing the rate of tax actually increases the tax take because British Entrepreneurs are Stimulated to create more wealth, and therefore pay more tax (in terms of £ rather than %) when the rate of tax falls.

Ergo, if HMG wants to increase the tax take (£) it needs to lower the tax rate to Bermudan levels.

Perhaps they could introduce some Bermudan weather too. They could bring it back in the planes taking Albanians to Africa. After all, we became rich in this country on the back of the first golden triangle: rubbish and religion to Africa, slaves to the Americas, yummy produce to the UK.

The serious answer to your question is that one of the advantages of a flat tax rate with no bargaining with HMRC over rebates means that everyone pays, nobody dodges and the running costs fall by 99%. @Weststander will confirm. And if the amount of tax flowing to HMG is insufficient, the rates can be increased (and vice versa).

The downside of this is that it would encourage a planned economy, rendering it difficult for the current 'game show' economics to persist. I am listening to the HS2 debate on R5. One person blamed the situation on Johnson who, when the project was ready to go but looking increasingly expensive, undertook repeated reviews (considering chopping bits of the line) with no framework defining what outcomes (if this cost/time then that change) the reviews should trigger (in other words standard Johnson making it up on the hooffery. But he bottled making any decision).

Funny old world.

 

[keaton]

No.

But, as you probably know, increasing the rate of tax reduces the tax take (apparently because British Talent moves abroad, and British wealth makers chose to create less wealth in order to take advantage of whatever wheezey tax loopholes exist).

On the other hand, reducing the rate of tax actually increases the tax take because British Entrepreneurs are Stimulated to create more wealth, and therefore pay more tax (in terms of £ rather than %) when the rate of tax falls.

Ergo, if HMG wants to increase the tax take (£) it needs to lower the tax rate to Bermudan levels.

Perhaps they could introduce some Bermudan weather too. They could bring it back in the planes taking Albanians to Africa. After all, we became rich in this country on the back of the first golden triangle: rubbish and religion to Africa, slaves to the Americas, yummy produce to the UK.

The serious answer to your question is that one of the advantages of a flat tax rate with no bargaining with HMRC over rebates means that everyone pays, nobody dodges and the running costs fall by 99%. @Weststander will confirm. And if the amount of tax flowing to HMG is insufficient, the rates can be increased (and vice versa).

The downside of this is that it would encourage a planned economy, rendering it difficult for the current 'game show' economics to persist. I am listening to the HS2 debate on R5. One person blamed the situation on Johnson who, when the project was ready to go but looking increasingly expensive, undertook repeated reviews (considering chopping bits of the line) with no framework defining what outcomes (if this cost/time then that change) the reviews should trigger (in other words standard Johnson making it up on the hooffery. But he bottled making any decision).

Funny old world.

I'd be interested to know the rate it makes sense at.

 

[Weststander]

No.

But, as you probably know, increasing the rate of tax reduces the tax take (apparently because British Talent moves abroad, and British wealth makers chose to create less wealth in order to take advantage of whatever wheezey tax loopholes exist).

On the other hand, reducing the rate of tax actually increases the tax take because British Entrepreneurs are Stimulated to create more wealth, and therefore pay more tax (in terms of £ rather than %) when the rate of tax falls.

Ergo, if HMG wants to increase the tax take (£) it needs to lower the tax rate to Bermudan levels.

Perhaps they could introduce some Bermudan weather too. They could bring it back in the planes taking Albanians to Africa. After all, we became rich in this country on the back of the first golden triangle: rubbish and religion to Africa, slaves to the Americas, yummy produce to the UK.

The serious answer to your question is that one of the advantages of a flat tax rate with no bargaining with HMRC over rebates means that everyone pays, nobody dodges and the running costs fall by 99%. @Weststander will confirm. And if the amount of tax flowing to HMG is insufficient, the rates can be increased (and vice versa).

The downside of this is that it would encourage a planned economy, rendering it difficult for the current 'game show' economics to persist. I am listening to the HS2 debate on R5. One person blamed the situation on Johnson who, when the project was ready to go but looking increasingly expensive, undertook repeated reviews (considering chopping bits of the line) with no framework defining what outcomes (if this cost/time then that change) the reviews should trigger (in other words standard Johnson making it up on the hooffery. But he bottled making any decision).

Funny old world.

It’s a governments thing. The cost of the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh tramline, new Berlin Brandenburg airport, 2 Scottish ferries all escalated beyond belief, whilst years came and went. Major & Blair funded £55b worth of infrastructure at a true cost to the public purse of £301b under PFI contracts https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2012/jul/05/pfi-cost-300bn

All roads or tramlines don’t lead to Boris . Governments are just awful at controlling the spend of our money on projects.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It’s a governments thing. The cost of the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh tramline, new Berlin Brandenburg airport, 2 Scottish ferries all escalated beyond belief, whilst years came and went. Major & Blair funded £55b worth of infrastructure at a true cost to the public purse of £301b under PFI contracts https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2012/jul/05/pfi-cost-300bn

All roads or tramlines don’t lead to Boris . Governments are just awful at controlling the spend of our money on projects.

No. But dithering and delaying and procrastinating were stock in trade of the Johnson, and I was merely reporting the ranter of R5 this morning.

Other opinions are of course available

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I'd be interested to know the rate it makes sense at.

That's a good question, but the answer may be simple: whatever rate it makes sense at.

With a flat rate and minimal need for bureaucracy the rate can be varied with forethought and nimbleness.