Money Under Mattresss Seized

[Gone baby gone]

If this person had spent the £200 a month or even £600 a month over ten years, on cars, holidays, consumer goods, meals out, a new bathroom, kitchen, carpets then there would be no issue. The thing that the government are targeting here are people who are saving money.

No, there would be an issue. If you are spending money with no evidence of having legitimately come by it (and paid tax on it), they can seize your assets under the same legislation they are using here.

So if he had spent the money on cars, consumer goods, property, a new bathroom, kitchens or carpets, they would take that.

[Quoth]

This chap may well have made the money that way, selling military memorabilia. His tax receipts should concur with this statement, and then he should be allowed to keep his money. If they concur.

Militaria fair? Receipt? Fat chance! Many of the 'dealers' at these fairs are not registered businesses and are evading tax in a big way.

As for other posters who think it is ok to evade tax, I just despair. Do these people want the police to keep us safe, courts to give us recourse to the law when wronged, doctors and nurses to heal us when we are sick, roads to drive along, streetlights to keep us safe? Of course they do, and they want someone else to pay for it.

Having seen some of the black economy from a safe distance, I have no hesistation in agreeing with this rule. Earn it, declare it, and you have nothing to worry about even if it is cash.

I concur wholeheartedly. Seems to be a minority viewpoint though.

Q

[enrieb]

As for other posters who think it is ok to evade tax, I just despair. Do these people want the police to keep us safe, courts to give us recourse to the law when wronged, doctors and nurses to heal us when we are sick, roads to drive along, streetlights to keep us safe? Of course they do, and they want someone else to pay for it.

Having seen some of the black economy from a safe distance, I have no hesistation in agreeing with this rule. Earn it, declare it, and you have nothing to worry about even if it is cash.

It would be more productive to spend time on the internet criticizing corporations that don't pay the tax they owe. If you genuinely cared so much about the tax revenue.

[endgame]

Do these people want the police to keep us safe, courts to give us recourse to the law when wronged, doctors and nurses to heal us when we are sick, roads to drive along, streetlights to keep us safe?

Oh, you forgot to include "give the bankers trillions when they loose at gambling"

[wickywackywoo]

Oh, you forgot to include "give the bankers trillions when they loose at gambling"

Yeah, exactly, but apparently I should just happily cough up for this.

I'm sure the guy robbed of £67k will console himself knowing that his money will be put to good use.

[Billy Ray Valentine]

What if the guy had done some gambling down the bookies? Ridiculous to take it without proof of wrong doing!

Easy to prove if this was the case.

[papag]

When my grandfather died he had £60,000 under his bed in a suitcase, saved up over many years. He just didn't trust banks. I had no idea they could do this legally.

Wise old man and in time many will follow his lead

[punter]

Your possible excuse doesnt make sense. £67000 at £200 a month. That would take 340 months or nearly 30 years. 30 years ago saving £200 a month would have been the preserve of the rich.

And you admit that the chances are that this guy made his money by wheeling and dealing, and evading tax. I dont see how this person has a leg to stand on.

It is a slippery slope evading tax. If one person gets away with it, soon we are all trying it on. If the government cant raise the tax it needs by being nice to us all, then it will eventually be superseded by a government that raises the necessary tax any way that it can. I dont want that sort of government.

(I did get avoiding and evading mixed up earlier. I meant evading, which is illegal.)

the government cant raise the tax it needs, it already spends far more than it brings in so you could argue if they're not being sensible why should citizens? tax avoidance is inevitable when they hike taxes so high, 67% is the top rate now I think we'll see the government raising a lot less in taxes

No one voted for the government to go on a massive spending binge or consented to this taxation, it's ridiculous and excessive.

[Billy Ray Valentine]

Not a good analogy. Athletics is a sport, and not that important in the scheme of things. Seizing and individual's property without proof of wrong doing is a tad more serious.

Would you mind if I hold your spare cash until you can prove where it comes from?

This is about the principle first enshrined in the Magna Carta, innocent until proven guilty.

The money has been confiscated, not stolen. If he has an innocent reason for having the money, then he will get to keep it. What do you expect the police to do? Let him have the money while they investigate and let him spend it/lend the money to mates to keep etc? Only for him to then be found guilty of money laundering/drug dealing, but the money has already well spent/disposed of?

Be interested to know if anyone has any ideas on this.

[Billy Ray Valentine]

If this person had spent the £200 a month or even £600 a month over ten years, on cars, holidays, consumer goods, meals out, a new bathroom, kitchen, carpets then there would be no issue. The thing that the government are targeting here are people who are saving money.

Put your thinking cap on will ya'.

[Injin]

This chap may well have made the money that way, selling military memorabilia. His tax receipts should concur with this statement, and then he should be allowed to keep his money. If they concur.

As for only to have to pay the IR what is owed, that again makes no sense. It is like giving everyone a free go at tax evasion, if you get away with it, you only lose what you would have paid legally anyway. No, thats not right, you should pay what you owe, plus an extra punishment on top, to deter others from taking the same action. That may mean prison, or further fines, but tax evasion must be deterred.

As for other posters who think it is ok to evade tax, I just despair. Do these people want the police to keep us safe, courts to give us recourse to the law when wronged, doctors and nurses to heal us when we are sick, roads to drive along, streetlights to keep us safe? Of course they do, and they want someone else to pay for it.

Having seen some of the black economy from a safe distance, I have no hesistation in agreeing with this rule. Earn it, declare it, and you have nothing to worry about even if it is cash.

All of which assumes that the government has the right to take your stuff.

It doesn't.

This is theft, pure and simple.

[punter]

Your post does pose a serious question. The problem is that the amount of cash that can be generated illegally is so huge that to allow it to go unchallenged threatens the state itself.

We all hear things about how bad are government is, yet most of us have enough to eat, clothes to wear and somewhere to live. I wonder if the people who criticise all of this realise what they are saying.

But if the government were to have to prove where every penny of cash came from when crooks deposit their ill gotten illegal and untaxed gains at the bank, then our government would collapse in short order, unable to raise tax from a legitimate sector that just cannot compete with the illegal sector. Think that would be a good idea? Maybe if you are mad.

So just like an athlete has to be responsible for everything in their body when drug tested, the only way to control this illegal cash economy is to put the onus of proof on you the individual. This isnt a problem for you if you are legal.

Problem for this guy though.

Too right too.

I think most of us look forward to the day the government collapses. As for your argument about uncontrolled government instrusion and people not having a problem if they're legal, you're absolutely wrong as governments and their employee's frequently trample on innocent people

government will not stop tax evasion, the bigger the state gets the more it seeks to raise in taxes, the more evasion will happen and the less in taxes it will raise sooner or later government will collapse itself like the Soviet union and many others over the years

[TTD]

The description is correct in principle, but receiving "cash in hand" is not a legitimate source.

It is a proceed of crime. The crime being Tax evasion.

tim

Only if the person is earning enough to be liable for tax.

If over 30 years I accumulate some cash in hand earnings which aren't enough to take me over the personal tax-free allowance in each year (currently £1800 or so?) and I put them in a shoe box, it's OK for the Govt to assume after 30 years that I got them by dishonest means and confiscate them?

[punter]

All of which assumes that the government has the right to take your stuff.

It doesn't.

This is theft, pure and simple.

but it's not theft because the law doesn't apply to the government, the Prime Minister and his officers are above the law. what a great country... you have nothing to fear if you're innocent (and not on the hit list)

[Injin]

but it's not theft because the law doesn't apply to the government, the Prime Minister and his officers are above the law. what a great country... you have nothing to fear if you're innocent (and not on the hit list)

Its theft because it's theft.

Law has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

[endgame]

Wise old man and in time many will follow his lead

There is nothing wise about hoarding cash under the mattress as its value will be stolen by inflation. This is why gold is money. If you must hoard money, hoard gold and silver, but not under the mattress, that is the obvious place. Try burying it and then the buggers will have trouble confiscating it!

[wickywackywoo]

The money has been confiscated, not stolen. If he has an innocent reason for having the money, then he will get to keep it. What do you expect the police to do? Let him have the money while they investigate and let him spend it/lend the money to mates to keep etc? Only for him to then be found guilty of money laundering/drug dealing, but the money has already well spent/disposed of?

Be interested to know if anyone has any ideas on this.

That's the whole point, they can't be arsed to find him guilty of anything - they just want the money

I wonder if the guy appreciates his money has been 'confiscated', not stolen Wonder what his chances are of getting it back. Be spent on keeping Labour voters in cans of Stella by now.

[wickywackywoo]

Its theft because it's theft.

Law has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Exactly Injin. Just because somebody creates a law saying it's ok to steal things doesn't mean it's not theft.

[punter]

if the guy had gold coins in his home - like kruggerands - would they also be confiscated since he can't prove where they came from?

say he had them from 20 years ago, he could have £50k worth of gold very easily and not be able to prove its purchase

rather worrying

[the_duke_of_hazzard]

Oh yes it is. When my wife and I bought our first house in the 70's, we had to put up a 25% deposit. Half was my savings - half was hers. However, when I came to do my end-of-year tax returns, the taxman insisted that her half consisted of money I'd been passing to her to avoid taxation (I was freelance at the time). It cost me quite a bit in time and accountant's fees to get off that hook.

I thought you could gift your wife as much as you wanted?

[enrieb]

No, there would be an issue. If you are spending money with no evidence of having legitimately come by it (and paid tax on it), they can seize your assets under the same legislation they are using here.

So if he had spent the money on cars, consumer goods, property, a new bathroom, kitchens or carpets, they would take that.

I disagree, because the police/government would not be aware how much money you had spent on all these consumer things, but I wasn't clear enough in my previous post so your criticism was correct.

Money laundering 101

Buy a damaged quality car that needs a lot of work, pay professionals to do the work and claim you did it all yourself.

Get a firm in to fit a new bathroom/kitchen, pay cash in hand and claim you did the work yourself.

Go on hoiday, get a cheap flight, book a hotel overseas, pay cash and have a great time.

Buy a stove/boiler the government won't know how many tones of coal you burn a year if you pay cash. The less you need to pay out through a bank or utility bill the less you have to earn.

Pay as you go mobiles, no landline, t mobile sim cards do not need to be registered.

Buy a rolex.

Buy gold.

Edited May 6, 2009 by enrieb

[InternationalRockSuperstar]

Avoid = legal tax planning.

Evasion = illegal non-payment of taxes.

Both are morally justified entirely in my book given the current state of this country.

Yes, but your advice and moral justifcation would probably not hold much water with a HMRC inspector.

that's because HMRC inspector don't have any morals.

[Pindar]

I wonder if they had the sense to check the dates on the notes and the denominations of notes. It might have revealed that the cash had in fact been built up over a number of years.

[Billy Ray Valentine]

I wonder if they had the sense to check the dates on the notes and the denominations of notes. It might have revealed that the cash had in fact been built up over a number of years.

You're speaking too much sense here.

Edited May 6, 2009 by Mr Ben

[dr ray]

Exactly Injin. Just because somebody creates a law saying it's ok to steal things doesn't mean it's not theft.

There is a principle at stake here. OK it does likely this money was obtained illegally, we don't know. But what if it was £76 or the £7.60 in your pocket? Can everyone prove where that money came from. If not the police can not only seize it but can lock you up.

It this the sort of country we want to live in? If we leave the interpretation of the law to police discretion we already know what they will do from the way they used the anti-terrorism legislation.