Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Is it morally wrong to pay cash in hand?

181 replies

Liketochat1 · 24/07/2012 15:15

Should paying tradesmen cash in hand be seen as tax avoidance? According to the Tories it should. What do you think? www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18968679 Hope the link works!

OP posts:
noddyholder · 24/07/2012 20:47

Gauke's wife is a tax avoidance lawyer!!!!!!!!!

WhereYouLeftIt · 24/07/2012 21:00

My DH works for himself, and some of his clients pay in cash rather than by card. It all goes through the books regardless, but it does cut down his bank charges, as he uses the cash to pay himself directly, rather than pay it into the business account and then transfer his wages out of the business account. Bank charges are ruinously high for handling cash.

It should be borne in mind that most tradesmen's turnover is too low for them to pay VAT, so there is no VAT to be avoided anyway.

WhereYouLeftIt · 24/07/2012 21:06

ttosca, I rather think the site that your quoting from may be a satirical/spoof/comedy site?

GnomeDePlume · 24/07/2012 21:25

I agree WhereYouLeftIt, it is bank charge avoidance not tax avoidance!

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos · 24/07/2012 22:40

No, it's not morally wrong to pay cash in hand.

Tax shouldnt be payable on essential services anyway.

Ryoko · 25/07/2012 00:30

Don't know if it's morally wrong to pay cash in hand, guess it depends on if you think it's morally right to fiddle 10k out of the expenses system like the fine upstanding member of parliament Mr Gauke.

morally right for millionaires to hide money in offshore accounts and pay barely any tax.

morally right for large companies to pay very little to no tax and in some cases not pay rent on their stores.

morally right to let bankers swan off with massive pensions after fucking everyone over.

TwoIfBySea · 25/07/2012 00:36

To make a call on morals it would be helpful for the MP to have some of his own. As he took that £10k for stamp duty on one of his houses then I feel Gauke has no authority to dictate to others.

Considering this cash-in-hand economy costs £2bn annually and tax avoidance costs £69bn annually I know what I would go after. But then that is all their mates isn't it? Whereas the cash-in-hand is generally people struggling daily to make ends meet.

DappyHays · 25/07/2012 14:25

All this cash that is being paid in hand will be buoying up the economy too, however. I'm assuming that all the tradesmen and hairdresses spend said cash on goods and services.

CinnabarRed · 25/07/2012 14:25

I hope no-one minds, but I'm going to cut-and-paste some of my posts from the other thread.

CinnabarRed · 25/07/2012 14:26

I know I bang on about this all the time on here, but please may I re-iterate again the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion? It's really important to the debate on tax.

Tax evasion is lying to HMRC about your earnings so you don't have to pay tax on them. It's illegal and is punishable by a prison term. This is what Gauke is talking about.

There isn't an agreed definition of tax avoidance. But a workable definition that most people recognise is "entering into a scheme that delivers a tax result that is contrary to the intention of parliament when it enacted the relevant tax law". The critical thing is that tax avoidance might be immoral but it isn't illegal. If HMRC think that a scheme is wrong then they will take the taxpayer to court but not under the criminal codes. If the court agrees with HMRC then the scheme doesn't work and the taxpayer has to pay HMRC the tax that HMRC argues is due. But there are no criminal sanctions.

Think of it like this: if a person is married, and fancies a bit on the side then it's immoral to have an affair [tax avoidance] but illegal to commit bigamy [tax evasion].

CinnabarRed · 25/07/2012 14:26

The problem with cash-in-hand working is that some people do choose not to declare their earnings, and they're almost impossible to trace in cash.

FWIW, HMRC take the view that tax evasion is almost always done by individuals (very rarely companies, although when companies are involved in tax fraud it tends to be because they've been set up purely to facilitate tax fraud rather than as a genuine business that also happens to minimise its earnings or overstate its expenses).

The individuals who commit tax fraud are either the very wealthy - the kind of people who have undeclared bank accounts in Switzerland - or the self-employed cash-in-hand workers.

How much does tax evasion cost the Excequer? Very roughly £20 billion a year, of which £15 billion is down to cash-in-hand workers. (That compares to annual tax receipts of around £450 billion a year, to give you some idea of the scale. The bill for tax avoidance is around £15 billion per annum, so tax evasion is a bigger problem than tax avoidance. That often surprises people.)

£15 billion is about the amount that would be raised by adding 1p to the basic rate of income tax. Or, to put it another way, how much it would cost if the VAT rate was put back down to 17.5%.

CinnabarRed · 25/07/2012 14:27

There's no problem at all with a trademan offering a discount or mates rates - that's his choice as a business man.

Provided he declares the income he's earned from his mate on his tax return.

There is an issue if he doesn't declare the income he's earned frm his mate on his tax return because that's illegal tax evasion.

FWIW, I don't think there's an easy answer to this. I'm certainly not going to start deducting tax from my cleaner's weekly money - I have no idea whether she earns enough to pay tax, or files a tax return, and neither is it any of my business.

I think we need a culture change which makes tax evasion as unacceptable as benefit fraud or drink driving. Only when a person's peers put pressure on him to conform will his behaviour change.

I would also offer an amnesty so that cash-in-hand workers who know they're in the wrong but don't know how to put it right can clear their slate. I know a teacher who did cash-in-hand tutoring when times were tight who lies awake at night panicking that he'll get caught one day. I'd love to help him get his position straight.

Aboutlastnight · 25/07/2012 14:31

I thought tax avoidance was OK - according to the government it's fine, Vodaphone is doing nothing wrong...

We pay in cash and what the person does with it is their busk ess not ours.

MarysBeard · 25/07/2012 14:36

I've never knowingly got a discount for cash, some tradespeople ask for cash, I don't any more feel the need to check their books first than I do when I use cash to pay for a bar of chocolate at the newsagents.

Want2bSupermum · 25/07/2012 14:49

I am paying the price I neigotiated. It is up to the person I am paying to report the income. This isn't any of my business nor do I want it to be. That is the job of inland revenue and if they suspect something and investigate I will help them do their job.

As a landlord I have stopped taking deposits because I strongly disagree with the deposit scheme that has been set up. The government should focus on repossessing the properties of rogue landlords rather treat all landlords as if they are dishonest. These comments seem somewhat similiar and I hope that the backlash is strong enough that they don't introduce some sort of payment scheme that everyone has to use when getting work done on their home.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 25/07/2012 15:44

How about the morality of a self-employed NRP working cash-in-hand and not declaring their full income to the taxman so that they can enjoy a nice lifestyle but dodge paying their fair share of child support?

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos · 25/07/2012 16:01

Cogito, that's wrong but not because it's someone avoiding paying tax, but because it's someone a oiling supporting their child.

They coud pay plenty of tax and still be morally wring for not supporting the child they created.

HipHopOpotomus · 25/07/2012 16:04

So they are essentially suggesting that it is immoral to pay for something in cash? Blimey Hmm

Clearly it is up to individuals/companies/businesses to pay the tax they are legally obliged to pay. But trying to blame an end user for paying in CASH - that is British Pounds Sterling Cash - is taking things way to far IMO.

CinnabarRed · 25/07/2012 16:30

Nothing wrong at all in paying cash.

Loads wrong in a business accepting cash payment, not declaring it to the tax man and thus reducing their tax bill. That's tax evasion. That's illegal.

HipHopOpotomus · 25/07/2012 16:32

Paying for fags at the corner store in cash - immoral???

CogitoErgoSometimes · 25/07/2012 16:33

"Cogito, that's wrong but not because it's someone avoiding paying tax"

CSA payments are worked out on declared income. So are things like Tax Credits for that matter. If someone is under-declaring i.e. committing fraud, the effect potentially goes much further than their tax-bill.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 25/07/2012 16:34

@HipHop.... Not 'paying cash' but 'cash-in-hand'. The well-known agreement where the client pays cash for a job, the tradesman docks off the VAT and then doesn't put the transaction through the books. It's as old as the hills.

Want2bSupermum · 25/07/2012 17:37

As far as I know paying cash in hand means you paid cash as soon as the job is complete, before the tradesmen walks out the door. Paying cash doesn't give any indication of timeframe. You could pay 3 months after in cash but that doesn't qualify as cash in hand to me.

Metabilis3 · 25/07/2012 18:17

@Cogito and of course some cash in hand people aren't declaring anything at all - the black economy is most definitely still a 'thing'.

Swipe left for the next trending thread