HMRC Direct Recovery Powers

[Zero Liability]

Signed! I can't think of an organisation more unfit to wield such powers.

[Coalman]

Done, and agree with Zero Liability.

[Jessica@WhiteFieldTax]

Signed. Are you OK if I cut and paste the original post onto other forums etc where there'd be lot of potential signers?

Yes, that's fine

[Contreras]

Signed. Are you OK if I cut and paste the original post onto other forums etc where there'd be lot of potential signers?

IMHO, please don't do that. Cut and pasting the same post across multiple public forums will easily be seen as an orchestrated spam campaign, with negative implications for the 'cause'. Wouldn't it be better to take a few minutes to understand the concerns and describe them in your own words?

That said, if anyone already has a letter for MPs then I'd happily use it verbatim. They are used to being lobbied and it'll only garner a standard response anyway, but it still serves to register a protest.

[tractor]

...

I signed.

If HMRC were a bank, school or hospital, they would be closed down without a doubt. How can you put a system into live that makes 6m errors pa and continues to do so? Simple regression testing against the last year's final tax codes would have shown that it was massively bugged and not fit for purpose!

The fault lies squarely with politicians of all flavours AND the senior civil servants that do not give a tulip simply because they owe no duty of care to anyone.

Under the banner of tax simplification, they introduce more and more complex legislation year on year. Even HMRC staff (mostly) do not understand the tax code and regulations.

They demonise, bully and ridicule the very people that subsidise them.

They allow politicians, large corporates and high profile sportspeople to evade tax and hound the little people into bankruptcy and even suicide.

It is unlikely anything will ever change.

Hence, they are not a fit and proper organisation to hold such powers.

[xoggoth]

Quite. Had two major challenges from HMRC during my contracting years and they were based on assumptions that bore no resemblance to the true situation. One would hope they would not take money from a bank without going through a proper investigation and giving the person/company involved a chance to contest it but who knows?

[barrydidit]

I signed up.

As others have pointed out, I'd struggle to think of a less suitable organisation to have the ability to dip into a persons bank account. Without any sort of independant oversight it's a recipe for disaster. I'd also expect mission creep to gradually extend the scope of these powers once enacted and the safeguards to be diluted as time went by - a £5k safety net might be considered ok today but 10 years of inflation may render it useless.

[SantaClaus]

Signed. I'll post it on the BN66 forum.

[zippy72]

Signed, and tweeted.

[GlenW]

Signed.