PROTESTERS were justified in gate-crashing an event at New College, Oxford, at which former HM Revenue & Customs head Dave Hartnett was speaking, according to respondents to an Accountancy Age poll.
Of the 112 responses, some 92% said the action taken by the WeAreIntuders protesters was completely reasonable, compared to the 1% who felt it was fair to some extent. About 3% felt the action was unfair, while 4% said it was entirely unwarranted.
The protesters – who object to so-called ‘sweetheart’ deals made with big business – arrived in black tie attire, posing as representatives of investment bank Goldman Sachs and telecoms giant Vodafone, before goading Hartnett (pictured) as he addressed assembled accountants and tax lawyers.
They presented him with a ‘lifetime achievement award for services to corporate tax planning’ and a bouquet of flowers before singing For He’s a Jolly Good Fellow – replacing the line “so say all of us” with “so say Goldman Sachs” – as they were ejected.
Hartnett retired from his HMRC role in the summer, and had been the subject of intense criticism over the tax settlements reached with five large corporations, including Goldman Sachs and Vodafone.
Protesters, including UK Uncut, claim the deals cost the public purse millions – in particular the Goldman Sachs settlement, which it challenged in court, claiming the Revenue let the bank off £20m in interest.
However, a report by the National Audit Office cleared HMRC of any wrongdoing, ruling that all five settlements had seen a “reasonable” outcome for the public coffers.
It did, however, criticise the process by which those deals were struck, highlighting a lack of clarity.
Vote in Accountancy Age‘s latest poll:
Phillip Gershuny, senior tax partner at Hogan Lovells, outlines how a European exit could affect UK taxes
London accountancy firm Blick Rothenberg warns of potential damages VAT changes could cause UK businesses
Two PwC whistleblowers and journalist to stand trial over alleged leaking of corporate tax documents
Governmental pressure to crack down on tax evasion is resulting in HMRC applying its criminal investigation policy in an inconsistent manner, writes Kingsley Napley's David Sleight