HMRC has released a report Qualitative Research with People Convicted of Tax Evasion, about the behaviour and experiences of people who have been convicted of tax evasion.
HMRC has released a report Qualitative Research with People Convicted of Tax Evasion, about the behaviour and experiences of people who have been convicted of tax evasion.
A research team conducted interviews with tax offenders. Although there was a small sample size (12 interviews), the report indicates that there is a wide range of reasons for tax evasion, including financial gain, altruism, keeping businesses afloat, and ignorance. Although the sample size was small, custodial sentences were generally seen as disproportionate to the offence committed and that prosecution had an adverse effect on offenders’ families.
Phil Berwick, tax expert at Berwick Law, comments: ‘The report is limited in value, in that it reflects the views of only a small number of offenders. The research does not include tax evaders who were prosecuted but did not get a custodial sentence. The report indicates that HMRC’s “scare tactics” have put off certain offenders coming forward, so a softer angle may be required to encourage some evaders to regularise their tax affairs. The impact on relationships with loved ones seems to have been a significant issue with many offenders, and this could feature in HMRC’s future advertising.’
‘The research highlights the dangers of meeting with HMRC, and cites the example of a taxpayer who thought he was just having a “discussion” with HMRC officers to help them with their enquiries. It is not a surprise that this resulted in the view that HMRC had been “underhand”. This serves as a reminder that taxpayers considering meeting with HMRC should take specialist advice before agreeing to do so, whatever pretext is given by HMRC for the meeting.’
The report indicates numerous training points for HMRC to address in relation to the behaviour of their officers, with criticisms that some of them were ‘aggressive’ or ‘intimidating’ and behaving in a manner that was disproportionate to the offence allegedly committed, at the time of their arrest.
Phil Berwick comments, ‘HMRC has a difficult task to effectively target tax evaders and potential tax evaders, particularly given the wide range of motivators. HMRC’s position is made more difficult given the view expressed in the research that if the rewards of tax evasion are big enough, the risk of a custodial sentence is one worth taking, for some, at least.'
HMRC has released a report Qualitative Research with People Convicted of Tax Evasion, about the behaviour and experiences of people who have been convicted of tax evasion.
HMRC has released a report Qualitative Research with People Convicted of Tax Evasion, about the behaviour and experiences of people who have been convicted of tax evasion.
A research team conducted interviews with tax offenders. Although there was a small sample size (12 interviews), the report indicates that there is a wide range of reasons for tax evasion, including financial gain, altruism, keeping businesses afloat, and ignorance. Although the sample size was small, custodial sentences were generally seen as disproportionate to the offence committed and that prosecution had an adverse effect on offenders’ families.
Phil Berwick, tax expert at Berwick Law, comments: ‘The report is limited in value, in that it reflects the views of only a small number of offenders. The research does not include tax evaders who were prosecuted but did not get a custodial sentence. The report indicates that HMRC’s “scare tactics” have put off certain offenders coming forward, so a softer angle may be required to encourage some evaders to regularise their tax affairs. The impact on relationships with loved ones seems to have been a significant issue with many offenders, and this could feature in HMRC’s future advertising.’
‘The research highlights the dangers of meeting with HMRC, and cites the example of a taxpayer who thought he was just having a “discussion” with HMRC officers to help them with their enquiries. It is not a surprise that this resulted in the view that HMRC had been “underhand”. This serves as a reminder that taxpayers considering meeting with HMRC should take specialist advice before agreeing to do so, whatever pretext is given by HMRC for the meeting.’
The report indicates numerous training points for HMRC to address in relation to the behaviour of their officers, with criticisms that some of them were ‘aggressive’ or ‘intimidating’ and behaving in a manner that was disproportionate to the offence allegedly committed, at the time of their arrest.
Phil Berwick comments, ‘HMRC has a difficult task to effectively target tax evaders and potential tax evaders, particularly given the wide range of motivators. HMRC’s position is made more difficult given the view expressed in the research that if the rewards of tax evasion are big enough, the risk of a custodial sentence is one worth taking, for some, at least.'
