For the G'ovt to have allowed Vodaphone and Goldman Sachs to leave unpaid tax bills?

[carocaro]

Tax has to be paid or else is the golden rule. So why not big business?

Can anyone please explain this to me because it makes no sense.

It's an absolute bloody disgrace!

Well in Vodafone's case there was a disagreement over how much tax was due. Enough grey area for the HMRC and Vodafone to argue for nearly a decade through what must be very complicated European tax laws. The result was after 10 years, the govt was still no closer to collecting the money. They could I guess have taken Vodafone to court but what if they lost? How much longer would it take?

So the new govt settled with Vodafone. Did they settle too low? Maybe, probably. But I guess their argument is that at least they got some money rather than none. And risk another 5-10 years before maybe getting nothing at all.

I understand Goldman Sachs was a mistake though rather than any collusion. A monumental cock up yes but mistakes do happen.

And just to put it into context, the HMRC collected £468 billion this year alone. So this notional £25 billion being reported not only is theoretical but even if taken as true is only 5%. In short, that still means HMRC is collecting 95% of taxes which isn't bad really.

Big companies spend fortunes with tax experts creating structures to minimise tax. HMRC challenge them. The experts argue the toss with HMRC officials (not many of whom are really top-drawer). Neither party wants to go to Court (they could rack up literally millions in legal fees and lose over what is, by definition, a "grey area"). The parties settle/compromise.

Legally they are doing nothing wrong and ate acting totally within the law. My argument is that those who choose NOT to work but live on benefits are EQUALLY acting totally within the law.
It needs tightening up both ways, the Govt cannot moralise about benefit claimants (and I mean those who don't WANT to work) while nodding and smiling to the likes of Vodafone.
I accept Vodafone contribute to society by job creation etc but equally not all those "lifestyle choice" benefit claimants are raising people who will be a burden.
Fairs fair, if we are expecting people to accept workfare schemes etc then the big companies (who are likely to profit) should be paying taxes properly.

As I understand it, these big companies have more money to spend on accountants and lawyers than HMRC, who are making people redundant.

We are all in it together, except for those with money.....

Which do you think is greater, unpaid tax or benefit fraud?

The way the media protray benefit claimants and the sick and disabled you'd be fooled into thinking it's the fraud but no.

£35bn unpaid tax vs £1.2bn benefit fraud.

Everyone makes - rightly - so much fuss about "scroungers" while usually completely ignoring companies such as Vodafone, Boots, Topshop not paying taxes because of a loophole.

Wrong, very wrong.

fullfact.org/blog/unpaid_tax_benefit_fraud_cost-3208

The £35 billion unpaid tax estimate includes both tax evasion (illegal) and tax avoidance (legal).

Most of us will avoid paying tax if we can do so. Not many of us volunteer to pay tax and companies are no different.

So when someone buy goods from shops in Jersey to avoid paying VAT, they're tax avoiders. For those husbands who put all their savings in their stay at home wives name, they're avoiding paying tax on their interest received. Those people are all taking advantage of loopholes. Are they to be pilloried and hated?

The figures are obviously a lot higher when it comes to companies but the principle is the same. Public companies have a duty to make money for their shareholders. And that includes minimising taxes they pay (Legally of course).

If you look at attached www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/mtg-2011.pdf, you will see that of the £39bn, £10bn is avoidance/legal interpretation, £4bn is unpaid (mainly due to bankruptcy).
This is not really unpaid tax in my view because the insolvent companies/people do not have the money and the avoidance/legal interpretation is where companies and individuals disagree with HMRC about the law. Remember, HMRC does not make the law but interprets it and wrongly in many cases, which is why court cases/discussions exist.
£4bn is the hidden economy (cash in hand etc) which is mainly done by individuals, often benefit claimants.
£10bn is illegal (evasion and criminal attacks)
Rest, £6bn, is mistakes - which are usually chased and collected
If you look at the calculation of the gap, particularly the VAT GAP, you will notice that this will include all of you who buy Cds and DVD's on-line as they are shipped from Jersey, VAT free. This is perfectly legal, but included in the tax gap because of how it is calculated.

The benefit fraud position is actually £3.3bn statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd2/fem/fem_oct09_sep10.pdf rather than £1.2bn

The trouble is that the issue is not simply about whether these large companies maximising profits for shareholders are doing so legally.
It is about whether hmrc can afford the fees to fight tax disputes raised by multiple million pound companies with large legal teams.

It is similar to the huge sums paid under no win no fee legal actions. Cases are settled based not on their validity but upon the economics of fighting.

Hmrc will kick the shit out of a small nosiness because they can. The big corporations know they have neither the time nor the cash so they wriggle and avoid.

And it has been like this for years. This is not a party issue. Labour fared no better.

Not a small nosiness. A small business.

Dave Harnett took his lead from Sir John Bourne.
They are both gone.
Good thing.

Private eye have been running this story for months. The Gs tax deal was agreed between Dave harnett and Gs over a dinner they paid for. Hmrc did not follow their own processes. They wanted a partnership approach with these companies paying their tax bill.

Dave harnett is one of the most wined and dined manderins. Funny that....

Accountancy Age have been sniffing around it for quite a while too .....
but yes, Lord Gnome is the reason the MPs even asked the questions

So did Goldman Sachs pay back the misunderstanding?

So can I pay 95% of my taxes then because it will be deemede pretty good?

And as someone who has claimed benefits this year due to redundancy I have no idea how you fiddle the system, they are on you like flies on shit, every minute of every day. I was late signing on one day due to a traffic accident blocking the road, late by 25 mins, and my jsa was not paid that week and it took 4 weeks to sort out. Benefit fraud must be teeny tiny compared to the number claiming it. But it is made out to be this massive thing draining the uk.