New Lie tax credit feck-up

[IR35 Avoider]

And on top of fraud is legal manipulation of the system, partners who have a relationship, but live apart to maximise the benfits as reported in last week's DT.

Benefits should be changed to be on an individual rather than household basis. (This does present a few challenges, but I think it can be done.) The calculation would assume that anyone claiming was sharing a household with one other adult. It would be up to them to ensure this was the case.

One problem with this is that non-working spouses and adult children of millionaires could claim. A possible answer is that in my flat-tax scheme with universal tax credit the amount you could get in benefits (over and above the tax credit you get anyway) would be negligible, probably zero in most cases. Benefits/tax credit would be no-where near enough to live on for an individual, but would be just enough for two people living together to survive, since income would be doubled but "two can live as cheaply as one", and if they chose to share with more adults they would be that much better off.

I know from personal experience, when my wife-to-be moved in with me, that my household bills hardly changed. In other words the cost of living per person halved. It is ludicrous that people supposedly poor enough to live on benefits are allowed to live alone.

[zathras]

The company with the biggest promises wins, with insufficient clauses in the contracts to punish them if they happen to knowingly promise more than they can deliver.

In addition these companies are first rate negotiators and ensure that in the most part the client department is found culpable in any failure and therefore they do not pay out penalties.

That EDS paid out in this instance is a minor miracle and probably the result of the legion of failures previously.

Mind you whoever designed a system which sets the amount you pay and then works out how much it should pay you back later has got to be crazy to think that it will work. Even more so but you can still get such credits and be on above average earnings.

[AlfredJPruffock]

Exactly. They would NEVER be THAT stupid. Noo noo nooo. So instead they will award contracts to competent people - such as us. Won't they?

Some while back there was a study done of government IT contracts. What they found is that they are negotiated by civil servants with little or no experience of negotiating big contracts, and no experience of dealing with the slick front-men put forward by large companies such as EDS. Hence they are out of their depth, and get carried away with slick presentations and promises, and end up singing bad contracts. The company with the biggest promises wins, with insufficient clauses in the contracts to punish them if they happen to knowingly promise more than they can deliver.

But then again, I expect that I've not told you lot anything new ...

Fungus.

They didnt get away with it with the French.

CUK readers might recall that ...

On the day before the largest ever deal of its kind to be done in France with Global engineering concern ALSTOM, EDS were uncermoniously told NON after they couldnt answer some rather awkward questions about their track record.

Somehow or other, senior personell had been sent some revelaing info , apparently via an anonymous email account.

Trop dommage ,Cest la Vie, mon ami.

[Fungus]

I just saw this on the BBC webtulipe.
Incroyable. Now you know where the taxes go....

You couldn't make it up.

I'm often surprised by the incompetence of government bodies. I was taken to court without my knowledge and fined £100 by Slough council for a mistake that they made. But fighting their lawyers was not worth the hassle. I was advised "Just pay". The HMC&E cancelled my VAT account when they sent a letter to my old address, and it was returned maked "not known at this address". Their main database had my correct address cos I'd told them when I moved. And IR keep sending me letters for numerous people I have never heard of, but who apparently are employed by my company. And they refuse to do anything about it. Clear proof that state controlled command economies are better than private enterprise.

Fungus.

[Fungus]

Add in an IT system which badly underperformed - to the point where the company responsible, EDS, has had to pay HMRC £71m in compensation - and the stage was set for the meltdown which duly followed.

Of course given the incompetence of EDS with this high profile Government debacle you can rest assured that the Government would never,ever,never never never never, not on your nelly, once bitten twice shy, award them another mega contract courtesy of the taxes from all those hard working familys.

Not in a month of Sundays, theyre not that stupid silly.

Well ?

Exactly. They would NEVER be THAT stupid. Noo noo nooo. So instead they will award contracts to competent people - such as us. Won't they?

Some while back there was a study done of government IT contracts. What they found is that they are negotiated by civil servants with little or no experience of negotiating big contracts, and no experience of dealing with the slick front-men put forward by large companies such as EDS. Hence they are out of their depth, and get carried away with slick presentations and promises, and end up singing bad contracts. The company with the biggest promises wins, with insufficient clauses in the contracts to punish them if they happen to knowingly promise more than they can deliver.

But then again, I expect that I've not told you lot anything new ...

Fungus.

[AlfredJPruffock]

Add in an IT system which badly underperformed - to the point where the company responsible, EDS, has had to pay HMRC £71m in compensation - and the stage was set for the meltdown which duly followed.

Of course given the incompetence of EDS with this high profile Government debacle you can rest assured that the Government would never,ever,never never never never, not on your nelly, once bitten twice shy, award them another mega contract courtesy of the taxes from all those hard working familys.

Not in a month of Sundays, theyre not that stupid silly.

Well ?

[BoredBloke]

"From the first day... our working assumption was that we would be the target of attacks"

....but obviously decided to do fuc all about it.

[John Galt]

HMRC insists that it took the risk of fraud into account when tax credits first opened for business.

"From the first day... our working assumption was that we would be the target of attacks" by fraudsters, HMRC executive director David Varney told the House of Commons' Public Accounts Committee earlier in December.

[Mailman]

Whats that you say...flat tax system to get rid of rubbish like this you reckon?

Mailman

[ladymuck]

And on top of fraud is legal manipulation of the system, partners who have a relationship, but live apart to maximise the benfits as reported in last week's DT.

People that live over the road do that. Well, sort of. They say they don't live together but the bloke's there all the time, he just moves out when some official comes round to check up on them. It's great living in a cul-de-sac, really appeals to my nosy voyeuristic nature.

[xoggoth]

And on top of fraud is legal manipulation of the system, partners who have a relationship, but live apart to maximise the benfits as reported in last week's DT.

[wendigo100]

I am speechless.

Apart from saying that of course.

[Fleetwood]

I just saw this on the BBC webtulipe.
Incroyable. Now you know where the taxes go....

You couldn't make it up.