Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
rollover

Hmrc's David Heaton Quits After Offering Tips On Avoiding Tax

Recommended Posts

A government tax adviser who was secretly filmed offering tips on how to keep money "out of the chancellor's grubby mitts" has resigned. He told the audience how they could exploit maternity pay rules "to get the government to pay your bonuses". He has said he does not advocate artificial or abusive tax arrangements. Two months after the conference - entitled 101 Ideas for Personal Tax Planning - Mr Heaton started work on the key HMRC panel. His job was to advise HMRC and the courts about artificial and aggressive tax avoidance.

"This is an absolutely classic example of where government passes a law with a particular intent and the tax advisers then abuse that and use it for a purpose that was never intended by government." Link

It looks like the right people advise HMRC.

Edited by rollover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a witch hunt this. The people with the knowledge and expertise to advise are the one such as him. Relying upon civil servants or regulators to understand how things really work is rubbish policy making and just results in an even weaker standard.

He was silly to talk like that at a conference, but there you go.

The real way to tackle it would be to take the top ten tax advisers in the UK, tell them that if they design a simple workable system that prevents tax evasion and avoidance that is implemented within 5 years, they will personally never have to pay income tax again - they'd bite the governments hands off. Set a goal something like - overall tax take up by 25% within 5 years, average tax paid by those earning (in any asset form) over 100,000 to rise to 25%.

By the way, the partnerships that are the Big 4 are structured in such a way that the partners pay little if any tax. All pushing him off the panel has done is freed up more time for him to make tax free money. I am sure he's upset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting- a bunch of people riot in london and a few other places and it's all night sittings at the courts and all the stops are pulled out to deal with this 'emergency'.

But the ongoing loss of revenue in the billions seems not to generate the same degree of urgency.

Perhaps because the former represented a threat to the interests of the ruling class- while the later represents more of an opportunity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a witch hunt this. The people with the knowledge and expertise to advise are the one such as him. Relying upon civil servants or regulators to understand how things really work is rubbish policy making and just results in an even weaker standard.

He was silly to talk like that at a conference, but there you go.

The real way to tackle it would be to take the top ten tax advisers in the UK, tell them that if they design a simple workable system that prevents tax evasion and avoidance that is implemented within 5 years, they will personally never have to pay income tax again - they'd bite the governments hands off. Set a goal something like - overall tax take up by 25% within 5 years, average tax paid by those earning (in any asset form) over 100,000 to rise to 25%.

By the way, the partnerships that are the Big 4 are structured in such a way that the partners pay little if any tax. All pushing him off the panel has done is freed up more time for him to make tax free money. I am sure he's upset.

Except what do you think someone who says "keep money out of the chancellors grubby mitts" will advise the government?

This is how you close this and this loophole, or everythings fine, nothing can be done, be on your merry way?

There are plenty of individuals who have been bringing this avoidance into the public eye. At least some of them have the relevant experience, why doesn't the gov ask some of them to be advisers......

Ofc the reasons why is very very obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting- a bunch of people riot in london and a few other places and it's all night sittings at the courts and all the stops are pulled out to deal with this 'emergency'.

But the ongoing loss of revenue in the billions seems not to generate the same degree of urgency.

Perhaps because the former represented a threat to the interests of the ruling class- while the later represents more of an opportunity?

Indeed.

The UK - by scum for scum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   202 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.