|
|
05 Mar 2009
The taxman’s clampdown on offshore evasion is being undermined by the failure to secure a high-profile criminal prosecution of a British investor, tax partners have warned.
Last August, Dave Hartnett, then acting chairman of HM Revenue & Customs and now permanent secretary for tax, said he expected to start its first prosecution of a British investor ‘within months’.
One potential area for a prosecution was the 300 UK investors with Lichtenstein-based bank accounts – ranging from professional investors and writers and including some ‘household names’, Hartnett said.
But since then there has been no news of a prosecution. Tax experts say a couple of prosecutions of Britons with offshore accounts would be a powerful deterrent and increase the impact of a second amnesty, preparations for which are expected to start by the end of next month.
In 2007 HMRC raised £400m after British taxpayers with money in offshore accounts run by high street banks were granted leniency in return for voluntary disclosure.
Stephen Camm, a tax partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers, said: ‘The ultimate fear for tax evaders is prosecution and the shameful publicity and threat to liberty this brings.
‘Unless HMRC successfully bring a prosecution of someone who has deliberately
hidden
money abroad to avoid tax, risk takers will sit tight and wait for HMRC to find
them rather than coming forward to voluntarily disclose unpaid tax,’ he added.
‘The lack of prosecution cases is currently undermining HMRC’s strategy to recover tax on money squirrelled away in tax havens.’
Stephen Besford, a tax director at BDO Stoy Hayward, added: ‘If HMRC are
going to prosecute some fairly high profile names
over the use of an offshore bank account it would have a much bigger impact if
they did it ahead of a second offshore amnesty.’
An HMRC spokesman said: ‘What we can say is that we want to ensure we prosecute wherever that is appropriate and wherever it represents the best value for customers.’
He added that HMRC preferred to deal with tax fraud through
civil action.
You may also like
Search thousands of financial jobs:
Search thousands of financial jobs:
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
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.
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
AccountancyAgeInsight is a frequently updated resource centre for finance professionals, offering a free and easy-to-use digital library of briefings, white papers and other information resources. 
Visitor comments Add your comment
Tell it to the fairies
"An HMRC spokesman said: ?What we can say is that we want to ensure we prosecute wherever that is appropriate and wherever it represents the best value for customers.?
He added that HMRC preferred to deal with tax fraud through
civil action."
I can think of several tens if not hundreds of tax credit claimants who would contest these statements. There is a strong rumour within HMRC that very senior members of the Civil Service and Government have taken advantage of this amnesty. If these individuals are not prosecuted it makes a mockery of HMRCs prosecution policy. Too many lunches with the high fliers and not enough straight forward action from those high up in the department. Ask some questions under FOI and see what you get.
Posted by: Angus, 10 Mar 2009 | 00:00