UK: Owe more than £1,000 in tax and the government will simply go into your bank account and take it
44 replies, posted
Tax dodgers who refuse to cough up could have their bank accounts raided by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs after stronger powers were handed to the taxman.
[IMG]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/19/article-2584556-1C6E40C700000578-339_634x526.jpg[/IMG]
The Chancellor declared: ‘The public tolerance for those who do not pay their fair share evaporated long ago – but we’ve had to wait for this government before there was proper action.'
At least £5,000 would be left in an account, the Chancellor said, as he ramped up HMRC’s debt collection powers.
[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2585234/Tax-dodgers-refuse-cough-bank-accounts-raided-HMRC-stronger-powers-handed-taxman.html[/url]
I thought it was 2014 not 1984
I'm a bit torn on this. On one hand, people evading taxes hurt the economy. On the other, hello privacy.
[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;44300685]I thought it was 2014 not 1984[/QUOTE]
a lot of things have been careening towards 1984 lately.
...break the law and government will simply put you in prison!
[QUOTE=lintz;44300729]a lot of things have been careening towards 1984 lately.[/QUOTE]
It's more like A Brave new world imo.
This does nothing to prevent tax avoidance (which where most of our tax money is lost, you technically don't owe the government anything due to loophole abuse), and most big companies will take the head of HMRC out for a nice lunch to broker them a ridiculously good repayment deal (it worked for Vodafone).
[QUOTE=The mouse;44300804]It's more like A Brave new world imo.[/QUOTE]
a mixture of both actually.
[QUOTE=Drag0nSnak3;44300718]I'm a bit torn on this. On one hand, people evading taxes hurt the economy. On the other, hello privacy.[/QUOTE]
It's a measure that requires sufficient oversight, for sure-- but in my opinion it's a very fair measure nonetheless.
[QUOTE=Chief Martini;44300907]It's a measure that requires sufficient oversight, for sure-- but in my opinion it's a very fair measure nonetheless.[/QUOTE]
It's only just emerged that 2 MPs and of those only one working full-time oversee our entire intelligence service. So I doubt it'll have fair oversight.
They won't use this to go after major corporations like Starbucks that keep their accounts offshore - they'll use this to go after small businesses and freelance professionals
Almost every company I know of around here set up 2 or 3 different companies officially to move money from one company to another in order to avoid taxes. For example you can have a company making buses, on the same premises they own a company that makes steel work, another that makes the composites, and another that assembles the whole thing together and you just funnel the money from one to the other.
I guess I'll be out of a job soon then
Fair enough
Better keep hitting the wrong people, how about shutting down tax havens and going after the companies that continue to not pay their god damn taxes.
Good intentions, questionable execution.
[QUOTE=Chief Martini;44300907]It's a measure that requires sufficient oversight, for sure-- but in my opinion it's a very fair measure nonetheless.[/QUOTE]
It's clearly a populists move. It's to impress less informed people, anyone with a bit of insight or ready to use google can tell you that it's corporate tax evasion/tax debt far outweights the private taxes.
[QUOTE=Drag0nSnak3;44300718]I'm a bit torn on this. On one hand, people evading taxes hurt the economy. On the other, hello privacy.[/QUOTE]
Won't be used against the big, rich tax dodgers, though. They're mostly sitting in Westminster.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;44300810]This does nothing to prevent tax avoidance (which where most of our tax money is lost, you technically don't owe the government anything due to loophole abuse), and most big companies will take the head of HMRC out for a nice lunch to broker them a ridiculously good repayment deal (it worked for Vodafone).[/QUOTE]
bet the hmrc head came up with this plan, just to get a nice lunch for free
Could be ok. What's a better scenario - pay to keep a tax dodger in prison and get no tax back from them, or just take the money they owe from their account?
This is theft no matter how you spin it. The public gains nothing from this. The fat cats will find ways around it, and the victims are going to be people who already have money problems.
The government need to close tax loopholes, most companies don't outright refuse to pay tax, they spend millions to find legal ways to not pay tax.
This isn't related to tax avoidance, but tax evasion. If a company has paid all the applicable tax according to the law, there's nothing HMRC can do.
That said, there is good news in the budget from an anti-tax avoidance perspective - particularly with the recent OECD focus on BEPS (Base erosion & profit shifting) where the G20 countries have requested an assessment of tax avoidance from a global standpoint.
I also understand that as of yesterday, there are new UK anti-avoidance measures in place which mean that a company which has transferred profits within a group may be taxed in full if that transfer is deemed to be for the purpose of tax avoidance. There seems to be other anti-avoidance stuff in the budget, but I haven't looked at it yet
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;44302135]The government need to close tax loopholes, most companies don't outright refuse to pay tax, they spend millions to find legal ways to not pay tax.[/QUOTE]
They actually closed one where companies were able to sell CDs and DVDs online tax free. They set up their distribution in Guernsey so as it's outside of the EU, was tax free:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Uk_map_guernsey.png[/img]
They closed that loop hole now but all it means is that CDs and DVDs are more expensive
[QUOTE=matt.ant;44302187]They actually closed one where companies were able to sell CDs and DVDs online tax free. They set up their distribution in Guernsey so as it's outside of the EU, was tax free:
They closed that loop hole now but all it means is that CDs and DVDs are more expensive[/QUOTE]
A taxed dvd is more expensive then an untaxed dvd? You don't say...
Really though, what did you expect to happen when an items price now includes tax?
Choices are
A- item stays same price
B- item decreases in price
C- item increases in price
It's one thing for a person to cheat on their taxes, but something totally different for a corporation to do it.
(I know this isn't in my country but still:)
I would never support a law that allows them to take money out of regular peoples bank account for taxes, but I would definitely support one that takes it out of a corporations' The way I see it, they are allowed to do business and make the (b)millions they do because of the taxes that are paid to keep the country running well, and cheating that on that level is terrible.
I say, seize corporate assets if that's what it takes, but leave single mothers(private citizens) alone. They wouldn't risk it if they didn't have too, but these companies just see it as another way to maximize profits.
[QUOTE=matt.ant;44302187]They actually closed one where companies were able to sell CDs and DVDs online tax free. They set up their distribution in Guernsey so as it's outside of the EU, was tax free:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Uk_map_guernsey.png[/img]
They closed that loop hole now but all it means is that CDs and DVDs are more expensive[/QUOTE]
yeah that hit Play.com pretty hard didn't it?
[QUOTE=JustExtreme;44303203]yeah that hit Play.com pretty hard didn't it?[/QUOTE]
play.com was going down for ages anyway
This isn't law yet, they're going to put it in the Finance Bill 2015, so we don't know the exact details of how it will work.
France and the US already have similar systems.
[editline]21st March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Buck.;44301001]Almost every company I know of around here set up 2 or 3 different companies officially to move money from one company to another in order to avoid taxes. For example you can have a company making buses, on the same premises they own a company that makes steel work, another that makes the composites, and another that assembles the whole thing together and you just funnel the money from one to the other.[/QUOTE]
They banned this practice as part of the budget.
[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;44300685]I thought it was 2014 not 1984[/QUOTE]
Pay your fucking taxes, or don't benefit from government regulations/systems.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.