aop
ad

HMRC instigates first carbon fraud raids

by Rachael Singh

More from this author

21 Aug 2009

The taxman has instigated the first set of UK arrests for alleged carbon tax evaders. Nine people including seven men and two women were arrested in the Gravesend and Greater London areas for over £38m worth of fraudulent VAT reimbursements on carbon trading.

Just fewer than 30 properties, both residential and business, were raided. A HMRC spokesman confirmed that all nine suspects have been bailed with no charges as yet having been made in connection with the fraud.

It is believed that the suspects were part of an organised crime group operating a network of companies trading in large quantities of carbon credits.

Fraudulent companies purchase carbon emission allowance credits abroad, which are VAT free. They then sell them to businesses in the UK at a VAT inclusive price. The VAT charged by the fraudulent companies is never paid to HMRC.

HMRC recently announced that it was implementing a zero rate of VAT on all carbon trading in the UK to prevent this type of VAT fraud which have been widely seen on the continent particularly France.

Another way that fraud can take place is that a company selling carbon emission allowances, also known as carbon credit, disappears or goes into administration before paying the VAT on the sale. Meanwhile the company which had paid for VAT on the purchase of carbon credits is reimbursed by HMRC without the taxman having received any VAT payments.

A HMRC spokesman said although there is now a zero rate of VAT on carbon trading: 'We will relentlessly pursue VAT fraudsters.'

'We will continue to investigate all frauds' he added.

Les Beaumont, deputy director of criminal investigation for HMRC said: 'HMRC investigates all criminal attacks on the tax system, halting theft of revenue, gathering evidence and supporting prosecutors in bringing offenders before the courts.'

Visitor comments Add your comment

Here we go again

Why doesn't HMRC just put every company on carbon credits under 'extended verification' and then keep them all hanging on for repayments in excess of 2 years? Then at the end of 2 years, just tell them they can't be paid because they had a 'means to know' that they were in a fraudulent chain of companies. Use the misinterpretation from the French Axel Kittel case, then they wont have to pay these companies any money at all and not bother conducting any investigtions. They can play judge and jury and be done with it.

This is exactly what they did in 2006, so why the sudden change of doing things properly? Is it because the bank are involved?

Posted by: Isis, 31 Aug 2009 | 00:00

Add your comment
display:none

Add your comment

We won't publish your address


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms & Conditions

Your comment will be moderated before publication

Submit

Search thousands of financial jobs:

Information currently unavailable.

Search thousands of financial jobs:

Newsletters

Get the latest financial news sent directly to your inbox

  • Best Practice
  • Business
  • Daily Newsletter
  • Essentials

Careers

Search for jobs
Click to search our database of all the latest accountancy roles

Create a profile
Click to set up your profile and let the best recruiters find you

Jobs by email
Sign up to receive regular updates with the latest roles suitable for you

Briefings

Supplier Statement Reconciliations cover

Supplier statement reconciliations: Manual chore or critical value adding process?

By looking at the reasons supplier statements became unfashionable, and the reasons why it is different today, this paper delves into the many benefits that can be obtained by automating the process.

7 Building Blocks cover

7 building blocks for business growth

Having a real and true view of your organisation’s current financial position, and having the right systems and processes in place, will ensure that you can make strong choices and are ready to capitalise on opportunities