HMRC firing off some "warning shots"

[moggy]

It is asking for trouble but the problem is, it's always the little guy/girl that bears the brunt of it because they're easier targets.

They may be better off chasing the agencies - this would close the loop holes after a few investigations, as i'm sure they would soon stop making payments to these schemes.

[The Spartan]

It would be a more sensible approach, think of how many contractors there are out there that don't have a clue now extend that to Joe Public and these are probably the majority of people who have signed up to these schemes. They would have been sold on "Legal", "Less tax" and "More money for you"

[JamJarST]

I agree that the view of what's moral is subjective, and therefore one has to abide by the law.

What is a grey area is whether that should be the letter of the law, or the spirit. Exploiting a legal loophole to pay less tax is asking for trouble.

But how do you determine the "letter" of the law? Which loopholes are within this "letter" and which are outside. After all using a Limited company to disguise your employment is considered a loophole by most of the press and public it would seem.

[moggy]

It would be a more sensible approach, think of how many contractors there are out there that don't have a clue now extend that to Joe Public and these are probably the majority of people who have signed up to these schemes. They would have been sold on "Legal", "Less tax" and "More money for you"

Agreed, the few chaps I know who have used these schemes were actually referred to them by their agencies anyway, and I can't imagine the teachers who were in the press being any different.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

IF HMR&C were more proactive and laid down what they actually wanted in terms of compliance they may have better results than just relying on knee jerk reactions

[The Spartan]

Now that would be a lot better, but no that makes far too much common sense. Another thing would be to look at Tax rates I'm not against paying tax but there comes a point when trying to strip the shirt of someones back just because they work hard becomes fecking annoying, especially when it's used to fund a bunch of whining ingrates

It seems the more you earn the more you pay where is the incentive?

[prozak]

So HMRC is spending money telling people they are already guilty. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

No they aren't.

They are sending letters telling people that because they are LEGALLY involved in avoidance schemes HMRC is going to pay them more attention.

The objective is clear and simple.

Get people to leave the schemes without having to pursue and probably lose investigations or court cases.

Hence increasing revenue and reducing costs without risk of further reducing revenue by legitimizing avoidance schemes.

[prozak]

It may not be illegal Brillo but it is 'immoral' - something which seems to be causing much consternation amongst our oh so whiter than white politicians

There is nothing immoral about avoiding tax.

It is every free-thinking citizens duty to avoid as much tax as possible.

Government is the least efficient and worst allocator of capital there is. This is one of those points where - were I so inclined - I could finish this sentence with FACT!

There is more benefit to the economy and your fellow man by paying less tax and spending your money. Therefore it is immoral to NOT try and reduce your tax bill.

[captainham]

wibble...

Which offshore scheme do you represent then?

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Now that would be a lot better, but no that makes far too much common sense. Another thing would be to look at Tax rates I'm not against paying tax but there comes a point when trying to strip the shirt of someones back just because they work hard becomes fecking annoying, especially when it's used to fund a bunch of whining ingrates

It seems the more you earn the more you pay where is the incentive?

Quite! In Hong Kong (I think) the higher the earnings, the lower the tax rate so you may pay say 30% for the first 100k but then 25% for the next 100k and so on - makes much more sense than our system of penalising people for success