Reply to: MP who used loan scheme accused of hypocrisy over tax avoidance

[DonkeyRhubarb]

HMRC are almost as slippery as the MoD when it comes to dealing with FOI requests.

[rcgeorge23]

Done.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...utgoing-500756

[DotasScandal]

I sent this FOI request to HMRC on Tuesday -

"In light of the recent news stories about Phil Boswell MP using the "Hyrax" tax avoidance scheme, please can you send me a list of all other current MPs who are using or have previously used a mass marketed tax avoidance scheme"

Yesterday they replied by email with a boilerplate response basically telling me they couldn't give me the information if asked for due to data protection.

I'd argue that knowing the tax affairs of our MPs is in the public interest. If they want everyone to pay their "fair share", then at the very least they should demonstrate that they are prepared to do the same.

Did you do that via whatdotheyknow.com?
If not (as I think), I would suggest making the request through that channel again. They will normally respond with the same boilerplate response you got already. Then, you can follow up by questioning it.

We can then link to the "conversation" and start publicizing the matter.

How does that sound?

[DaveB]

I sent this FOI request to HMRC on Tuesday -

"In light of the recent news stories about Phil Boswell MP using the "Hyrax" tax avoidance scheme, please can you send me a list of all other current MPs who are using or have previously used a mass marketed tax avoidance scheme"

Yesterday they replied by email with a boilerplate response basically telling me they couldn't give me the information if asked for due to data protection.

I'd argue that knowing the tax affairs of our MPs is in the public interest. If they want everyone to pay their "fair share", then at the very least they should demonstrate that they are prepared to do the same.

There is precedent for getting stuff like this but it requires a lot of time and effort and a willingness to persue it though the courts. Thats what happened with the expenses scandal. Although irrelevent in the end it went to the Information Tribunal, was then appealed and eventually upheld. Parliament had already agreed to release the information by the time the final appeal was heard.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I bet if a few years ago someone had requested the same about MPs expenses it would have been denied due to data protection...

That's what did happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...al_proceedings

[BrilloPad]

I sent this FOI request to HMRC on Tuesday -

"In light of the recent news stories about Phil Boswell MP using the "Hyrax" tax avoidance scheme, please can you send me a list of all other current MPs who are using or have previously used a mass marketed tax avoidance scheme"

Yesterday they replied by email with a boilerplate response basically telling me they couldn't give me the information if asked for due to data protection.

I'd argue that knowing the tax affairs of our MPs is in the public interest. If they want everyone to pay their "fair share", then at the very least they should demonstrate that they are prepared to do the same.

Well done for trying.

I bet if a few years ago someone had requested the same about MPs expenses it would have been denied due to data protection...

[rcgeorge23]

I sent this FOI request to HMRC on Tuesday -

"In light of the recent news stories about Phil Boswell MP using the "Hyrax" tax avoidance scheme, please can you send me a list of all other current MPs who are using or have previously used a mass marketed tax avoidance scheme"

Yesterday they replied by email with a boilerplate response basically telling me they couldn't give me the information if asked for due to data protection.

I'd argue that knowing the tax affairs of our MPs is in the public interest. If they want everyone to pay their "fair share", then at the very least they should demonstrate that they are prepared to do the same.

[webberg]

I'm not sure HMRC would be able to easily cross-reference the APNs against the criteria "former MPs" - certainly not within the £600(?) limit for FoI enquries.

The data is all in one place (Public Department 1, Ty Glas, Llanishen, Cardiff).

Collating the data would not be difficult or expensive.

Condientiality however is a much more difficult question.

[jonnieboy]

I know I am probably going to show my ignorance here. But could you asking how many current or former MPs have APNs against them?

I'm not sure HMRC would be able to easily cross-reference the APNs against the criteria "former MPs" - certainly not within the £600(?) limit for FoI enquries.

[BrilloPad]

Personally I would say, don't waste your time.

What actually is "tax avoidance"?

I've been doing this for 40 years and I would not suggest a definition, so putting that into a FoI is going to be tricky!

I know I am probably going to show my ignorance here. But could you asking how many current or former MPs have APNs against them?

[webberg]

Webberg

They may be confidential, but could an FOI request ask how many registered MP's have an open enquiry for tax avoidance.
Just a thought.

Personally I would say, don't waste your time.

What actually is "tax avoidance"?

I've been doing this for 40 years and I would not suggest a definition, so putting that into a FoI is going to be tricky!

[cliffordthedog]

Webberg

They may be confidential, but could an FOI request ask how many registered MP's have an open enquiry for tax avoidance.
Just a thought.

[webberg]

Our legislature has a duty to write laws that are clear, unambiguous, and reasonably easy to understand.

[/rant]

I would TOTALLY agree with this statement.

Unfortunately we have a broken system.

Politicians fail to consider the long term impact of their tax policies preferring instead to think only of the short term position and whether whatever they propose will get them votes. As such they give the draughtsmen only the vaguest of direction and hope that HMRC can fill in the gaps.

HMRC cannot do that no matter what resources and early warning systems for avoidance they employ. Instead they constantly play catch up.

The result is a mess. Inadequate law driven by vague policy. The Judges do their best to stitch together a coherent picture but frankly there are some things you cannot polish.

The scheme at the heart of this one day wonder for the Daily Fail, is perhaps one of the weaker ones in the pack (in my opinion), and I suspect that MP or not, as and when HMRC get to Hyrax, an enquiry letter will be sent.

Unfortunately there is no way of using FoI or similar to check as the tax affairs of individuals, MP's or not, are confidential.

[ASB]

But I have to agree, wrong is subjective. Like "fair share".

Quite agree. In my view there is no moral case to be made.

If TPTB believe something to wrong then they should legislate accordingly. Everything gets made emotive.

The problem is it gets more difficult with civil rather than criminal action.

Certainly an avoidance scheme is subjective as to whether it is appropriate; but whether it is effective or not is - or should be - simply a matter of applying the rules (preferably those from the time, not amended later) to the details. That comes out with one of two answers. "well it works but we'd rather it didn't" isn't one of those.

Our legislature has a duty to write laws that are clear, unambiguous, and reasonably easy to understand.

APN's etc hinder that. A lot. They remove any necessity to get it right and we simply get rules which become "something like this", and then later down the line "well what we meant was". It's a ridiculous state of affairs. But all the signs are it is going to get worse.

Find abuse (of whatever), legislate against it going forwards. It has to be more cost effective. How much public money has been spent on going backwards and introducing this current climate. It surely has to be more than can ever hope to be recovered from their victims.

[/rant]

[BrilloPad]

Well "wrong" is subjective. But perhaps making use of a "tax avoidance" scheme, and not disclosing that you have whilst vocally castigating others who do after your election could be seen to be hypocritical (and I think that being hypocritical is wrong)

All politicians are hypocritical. George Osborne and Margaret Hodge are well known tax avoidance users.

Then look at public schools. NHS. The list goes on.

But I have to agree, wrong is subjective. Like "fair share".