Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

Hartnett gets golden handshake from tax activists

by
25th Sep 2012
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

Dave Hartnett, the former permanent secretary for tax at HMRC, was honoured “for services to tax avoidance” by tax protesters at the Practical Tax Planning conference in Oxford last week.

Hartnett was at the New College Oxford event, hosted by Tax Chambers, when a group of activists gatecrashed his after-dinner speech and presented him with an award for services to tax avoidance.

The protesters, known on YouTube as WeAreTheIntruders, arrived in black tie attire, posing as representatives of Goldman Sachs and Vodafone. The former Revenue boss was presented with a “lifetime achievement award for services to corporate tax planning” and a bouquet of flowers.

Fellow diners initially reacted positively, thinking the award was genuine, until the penny dropped, leading to the group being ejected from the hall singing “For He's a Jolly Good Fellow”.

A dinner guest, believed to be a senior tax lawyer, called the protesters "trespassing scum" and told them to leave "before we set the dogs on you".

The group of eight friends include two former Oxford University students, an Oxford Green Party councillor and a Guardian columnist.

Stephen Reid, the leader of the group, who works for the think-tank New Economics Foundation, said they were "outraged to discover that Mr Hartnett, who was responsible for collecting tax from these corporations, could be found sharing port and cheese with their executives".

AccountingWEB members reacted to the video before the mainstream press picked up on the clip, which has now gone viral online. Midlands Accountancy said “I really think every accountant should have that on their web page. Dave Hartnett was to HMRC integrity what Genghis Khan was to international diplomacy.”

Hartnett retired from HMRC over the summer following increasing pressure over alleged “sweetheart” tax deals with Goldman Sachs and Vodaphone.

He was accused of signing off on a deal that saved Goldman £20m in interest payments and another which reduced Vodafone's tax bill from £8bn to £1.25bn.

However an NAO report has since cleared HMRC of any wrongdoing - ruling that all settlements had seen a “reasonable” outcome.

Replies (13)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By nogammonsinanundoubledgame
25th Sep 2012 17:42

The final sentence is ...

... to me both illuminating in some respects and opaque in others.  If the NAO says that what he did was kosher, then who am I, in the absence of all of the facts, to condemn him?  The NAO has a history, after all, of being less than sympathetic to HMRC in the round.

What would interest me is if all of the evidence on which the NAO came to its conclusion is in the public domain (I suspect not), or whether it might be made public in a few decades.

With kind regards

Clint Westwood

Thanks (0)
Replying to Adrian Pearson:
avatar
By The Limey
26th Sep 2012 09:51

Reasonable does not always mean kosher

nogammonsinanundoubledgame wrote:

If the NAO says that what he did was kosher, then who am I, in the absence of all of the facts, to condemn him?  The NAO has a history, after all, of being less than sympathetic to HMRC in the round.

The NAO did not say that what he did was kosher, and in fact said that HMRC's litigation strategy policy was either not followed or "it was not clear that it was followed". The judge did say that he thought that the settlements HMRC had reached were reasonable, given the wider uncertainties, other disputes with the same taxpayer, and what HMRC had agreed to in other similar cases. They are different things.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Midlands Accountancy
25th Sep 2012 18:36

Next week .......
Tony Blair receives an award for his outstanding contribution to peace in the middle east.Gordon Brown receives an award for services to covert tape recording,The entire population of Greece receive an award for services to the euro.Gordon Ramsay receives an award for services to the F***ing  english language.The England football team receive an award for outstanding comedy moment by claiming they could win the world cup.

 

 

Thanks (4)
Replying to leshoward:
avatar
By Siilycountry
26th Sep 2012 10:23

Henry Kissinger's beaten you to it

When he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973, Tom Lehrer was moved to remark that it was the day that satire died.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By uktaxpal
26th Sep 2012 01:59

@Clint Try a freedom of information request

Thanks (0)
By Giles M
26th Sep 2012 07:46

Sadly, we will not now find out what Mr Hartnett thinks.

Having agreed in principle to an interview with me for TAXtv discussing the highs and lows of his Revenue career, he has now withdrawn from all such media work because of continued 'stunts'.

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
26th Sep 2012 08:05

Excuse?

Why wouldn't he give an explanation? By going into hiding he enforces the view that he has something to hide.

The public are concerned that large corporations appear to be getting very favourable deals from someone who is regularly wined & dined by these same corporations. 

It isn't unreasonable of the public to want explanations rather than cut & dried verdicts.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By nogammonsinanundoubledgame
26th Sep 2012 08:26

FOI

I would expect an application under FOI to be rejected due to DPA protections.

With kind regards

Clint Westwood

Thanks (0)
avatar
By uktaxpal
26th Sep 2012 09:58

@Clint Dont pre-judge.I personally think a FOI request would be successful as its the sort of information that should be in the public domain after all its a public body.Give  it a go and appeal if not successful.Be an optomist.

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
26th Sep 2012 10:15

Cost?

I got the impression (rightly or wrongly) that the NAO implied that the agreement was acceptable because the costs of pursuing the penalties/interest would have outweighed the benefits to the taxpayer. This is quite different to saying everything these corporations, and Hartnett, did was kosher.

I admit I am biased, but isn't this always the result of aggressive avoidance by large corporations and wealthy individuals. Whether the taxpayer wins or loses it ends up costing the country vast amounts of money, either in lost revenue, or investigation/litigation costs.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By nogammonsinanundoubledgame
26th Sep 2012 10:33

Well, if ...

... a proper cost/benefit analysis accurately concluded that the cost to the taxpayer in pursuing a debt (multiplied by the probably of ultimate success etc) would outweigh the debt being pursued, and if that was the sole or main reason for the deal that was done, then it seems to me that that is no indictment of Hartnett.  It might be an indictment of someone else (or some other body); just not Hartnett.

Somehow I would take some persuading that this type of calculation stacks up where the write-off of Vodafone's bill was about £5 bn, but I keep an open mind.

With kind regards

Clint Westwood

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Mark Three
26th Sep 2012 11:16

Tony Blair said he regretted..

the Freedom of Information Act - which just about says it all.  People do need to be called to account for their actions and this is sometimes through FOI.

The thought and knowledge that what you do in secret can be made public can and should have a positive effect on your actions.

Personally I thought the 'stunt' was brilliant.  There are so few ways of effectively dealing with the 'big boys' (as noted above with cost/benefit, NAO et al)  but comedy and stunts like these do help to change public policy and the actions of individuals.  

Thanks (2)
By Alastair Johnston
27th Sep 2012 10:47

Scum? It could have been worse.

"A dinner guest, believed to be a senior tax lawyer, called the protesters "trespassing scum" and told them to leave "before we set the dogs on you"."

 

Just as well they were at Oxford.  Imagine what he would have done if they had been plebs!

 

 

Thanks (0)