THE START of this month saw the rolling out of a new government web domain - encompassing 13 other government departments and agencies as the Cabinet Office looks to locate all government websites in one place.
The launch of 'Inside Government' on the GOV.UK domain supersedes the old HM Revenue & Customs site along with others, notably including Directgov and Businesslink.
On an aesthetic level, the site appears sleeker, easier on the eye - using pictures for the first time - and highlighting new stories and updates much more strongly than before. On that level, it's a far cry from the clunky, dull site that previously existed.
Unsurprisingly, HMRC's head of digital engagement Robin Riley hails the "dramatic" difference between the two sites and notes, crucially, that the site is now "cross-linked to overall government policy" - in other words, government sites are better interlinked.
There has, however, been criticism since the site was piloted in October last year, with users complaining technical details appeared to be located in the wrong areas of the site, and at times users were requested to supply the wrong information.
Of course, integrating the content of the original HMRC site into a new one requires a significant amount of information being transferred, which can potentially lead to data being lost or altered.
Indeed, that is the crux of the problem for many users - in that much of the site's content has been re-written in order to fit into a sleeker, more simple theme - which in the complicated and vitally important world of tax has something that many feel is likely to introduce inaccuracies.
CheapAccounting founder Elaine Clark says that while it is understandable that the government does not want to spend significant funds keeping various sites running, it risks "losing sight" of the original purpose of the HMRC site.
Not only did the original site provide information to the public, but it acted as a Bible to tax agents, advisers and accountants, Clark says, and in re-writing the content, she fears HMRC will "dumb down the content beyond all recognition".
It's a legitimate concern. Indeed, many are asking whether it was at all necessary to change the pre-existing information. After all, re-writing affords the opportunity for interpretation - or, rather, misinterpretation - and human error.
Then there is the fact that this comes at a time of huge technological change for HMRC, with the advent of the substantial real-time PAYE project to commence in earnest from April.
It's a scheme that will see PAYE reported on or before the date payment is made, while changes to a person's circumstances will be made straight away rather than at the end of the financial year, and is something likely to demand a huge amount of resources, particularly initially.
It is hoped that the new way of reporting will be quicker, easier and more accurate, with more than four million individuals now reporting their pay through the scheme having taken part in the pilot.
And while HMRC has consistently heralded real-time as a resounding success, embarking on two major upheavals simultaneously is, at the very least, a bold move - and one which could not only define the taxman's 2013, but years to come, too.
I design backend software for complex websites and I can see that HMRC are making an effort to improve things. The trouble is that they are trying to deal with an impossible situation of tens of thousands of their staff interfacing with millions of taxable entities (that is you, me, small businesses and organisations). It isn't necessary to do things this way but government fails to understand that there is an entirely different way of doing things that clears up the current ineffective, inefficient, expensive morass. What I mean is that you can scrap PAYE, NI and 95% of tax forms and tax forms by simply asking the banks and building societies to do something socially useful! What! you might ask! Surely not ... we couldn't possibly do that ... ask them to do something socially useful! We can and we should. That is ask the banks and building societies to deal with HMRC and for HMRC to deal with them. What does that mean? It means gross pay paid into an “income account” which is simply a current account that is open to HMRC scrutiny. You have your gross wages and any tax credits paid into that account and the bank either supplies the information to HMRC or eventually works it out on behalf of you, me and the government. What does HMRC become … well a retail bank inspectorate … a much more sensible, and popular, role for them. Mind you HMRC won't need so many staff about 1/5th I reckon. Any way if you are interested in the future of tax and benefit administration have a read of http://taxandbenefit.com. If you like what you read signup and make the UK government do something useful for a change. Just imagine no more tax forms, no more tax codes, no more PAYE/NI for small companies to work out, all your tax and benefit information in one statement online, no more census forms, better Internet security, retail banks properly monitored, plus a choice of who to use and who to fire! Of course the banks won't be happy to do it … but don't you and I own a few of them now! Now given I'm writing this for AccountancyAge … would this mean less accountants? Oh! Dear … that's blown it! Don't worry … the government won't do it … their too lazy. Phew!
Posted by: GS, 09 Mar 2013 | 11:02
You may also like
If budgeting is to have any value at all, it needs a radical overhaul. In today's dynamic marketplace, budgeting can no longer serve as a company's only management system; it must integrate with and support dedicated strategy management systems, process improvement systems, and the like. In this paper, Professor Peter Horvath and Dr Ralf Sauter present what's wrong with the current approach to budgeting and how to fix it.
In this white paper CCH provide checklists to help accountants and finance professionals both in practice and in business examine these issues and make plans. Also includes a case study of a large commercial organisation working through the first year of mandatory iXBRL filing.