As the Director of Public Prosecutions makes a keynote speech about tax evasion amongst the middle classes, perhaps this heralds a new government policy to clamp down on those who rip us off.
What would you do with an additional £533? The mouth waters at the prospect of buying a new television or iPad, getting the legendary Arcam rCube, flying to New York, or possibly enjoying a luxurious spa visit or that special weekend for two in a top hotel.
It is rather distressing to learn that with all of these tempting choices, I spent this sum on funding a tax evader. So did every other reader of this column, not to mention everyone else in the country.
Admittedly, some of those investors did rather well out of it. They might have given £533 to the generality of tax evaders but they will have benefited to the tune of many times as much, in some cases millions, through the use of schemes that are at best questionable.
When Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions decided to announce that he was increasing the number of potential criminal prosecutions for tax evasion fivefold to 1,500, it was a little unkind to point out how much we are all donating to these criminals.
This new hard approach begs an awful lot of questions. If these incredible amounts of money are being stolen from us, why have succeeding governments, the tax authorities that they fund (to an increasingly limited extent) and possibly even our esteemed Fourth Estate not done far more to remedy what can only be described as an outrageous position.
From a different viewpoint, should those that promote schemes to minimise tax liabilities really spend years behind bars next to murderers and rapists, all at public expense?
This all harks back to several previous articles suggesting the need for properly beefing up the Revenue, which must make sense.
While more criminal prosecutions, as long as they are successful, will be a good start, this is only scratching at the surface of a much bigger problem.
The General Anti-Abuse Rule (affectionately nicknamed GAAR like some family pet) might help. Already though, tax planning outfits are sending promotional material to innocent members of the public suggesting that they can reduce tax liabilities to a staggering degree.
Indeed, a recent e-mail suggested a plan that would, given the right commercial circumstances to be fair, lead to a capital gains tax rate of less than 1/10 of 1%.
This might well be perfectly legal but, if so, the Chancellor of the Exchequer should surely be taking the requisite steps to consider whether subsidising tax reduction schemes represents an appropriate use of public funds.
Regardless of specific tax avoidance plans, whether abusive or not, rearming the Revenue and establishing a general tax amnesty would bring in untold billions if operated correctly. Similarly, taking a root and branch approach to analysing the way that our taxing authority operates and getting experts into the right places would undoubtedly have a major impact on the Black Economy.
It seems unlikely that very many of us would applaud the efforts of those involved in tax evasion, while a significant majority might not feel wholly distressed if those promoting abusive tax avoidance were also brought to book or even given long prison sentences.
Let us therefore hope that this headline-grabbing announcement is the start of something significant. Even better, perhaps within a couple of years we might actually be able to spend that £533 on something that we want, not a second yacht for somebody who really doesn't need the extra funds or even just a Spanish holiday home for a modest member of the middle classes.