HMRC buy stolen information from convicted fraudster

Given that HMRC's position is now that they can buy data from anyone, ignoring any legal rights to that data, as long as the benefit is greater than the cost...

Would they be interested in meeting an associate of mine who can run off as many copies of MS Office as they like, for a significant saving from the official price? It would save the department a lot of money.

And for their leisure time, he also has the latest gangster movies on DVD, as well as some classic farces.

[As I know you are all required to report any suspected illegal activity, I'd like to make it clear that this is not a genuine offer]

Liechtenstein has just issued an international arrest warrant against Mr Keiber over 'alleged' theft of client data.

More from the BBC website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7292514.stm

Leo
----------
Accountant Websmiths

what is the problem with getting information in this manner.......the police get information from criminals all the time....

given that you probably need alot of money to open a bank account with the bank owned by crown prince precious i have no sympathy with any tax dodging british taxpayer who is not paying their due.....i pay what i should and i dont have tons of money so why the tears for the greedy rich?

some of the precious contributors to this discussion should re think where their sympathies lie......

As you say, informants are paid, and all sorts of data is stolen and exchanged. Nothing ridiculous here. Why don't you do a FOI?

Sorry Nicola but I think we are moving from the sublime to the ridiculous here. Paid informants are giving information on illegal activities and while it may seem dubious I think we all know and accept that it happens.

However to the best of my knowledge it is not illegal to hold a bank account in Lichtenstein. It may be suspicious but not illegal. In my opinion there is therefore a distinct difference to be made in this situation.

Finally to compare and justify the purchase of stolen data in this instance with the activities of the "secret service" in WW2 is going just a little too far don't you think?

There is nothing unusual about government departments obtaining and paying for info from dodgy informants or criminals, particularly if this leads to preventing serious and organised crime. This is why MPs are not breaking ranks over this one, and I would be surprised if the professional bodies did either - in fact the ICAEW just mentioned the story and has not passed any judgment.

Consider what is exchanged in the process of plea bargaining, for instance? Information in exchange for a reward given to someone who is most possibly up to their neck in it. Think of the alleged favours afforded to some supergrasses over the years, and what about some of the activities of "the secret service" during WW2?

This morning I heard that we are now paying an allowance to foreign criminals to go and relocate overseas, that really takes the biscuit, we don't even get any information out of them! Take, take, take.

I wonder if this DVD purveyor has also come across the very many DVD/CDs lost/stolen from the HMRC? It strikes me that if he's in that line of business, he might be able to provide some useful information!

Also seeing as the HMRC seems to be legitimising buying stolen electronic information it surely won't be able to complain when various criminal groups do likewise with that which "belongs" to the HMRC itself.

Hywel

So Nicola, two wrongs make a right? Where do we go from here? Seems like a very slippery slope to me! We know who will be in the mire when we get to the bottom of it - and it won't be Dave Hartnett, unless someone (ICAEW / ACCA / CIOT) starts raising a fuss now!

Is HMRC so willing to stand so low as to buy stolen property from criminals? Does it mean that we have bee given the green light to acquire stolen property? What is good for the goose must be good for the gander re Mapley Steps? This is all wrong and surely there must be a standard be should be observing and not corruption

Given that Lichtenstein has refused to cooperate with the OECD and adopt a more transparent way of working, then this is about the only way information can be extracted.

Those on the list who have declared their income have nothing to fear other than hassle if they are asked a few questions. HMRC has various new powers at its disposal, particularly so if there is an suspicion that funds have been generated from criminal or terrorist activity.

I think it is shocking that HMRC should give UK taxpayers money to a fraudster in exchange for what he claims is accurate personal data about UK taxpayers.

As far as I know, HMRC are obliged to comply with the fourth data protection principal, which requires that they take "reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the data". I would be intrigued to know how they think they've complied with that.

Out of interest, did he send them the DVDs in the post?

This episode also shows that, contrary to common conception, HMRC is supporting entrpreneurs, albeit foreign, criminal entrepreneurs :-)

Set a thief to catch a thief, isn't that what they say?

There seems to be a degree of anxiety that there is something morally wrong with what we and the germans have done, but if you take the view that Liechtenstein's entire raison d'etre is as a recipient of dirty money, then maybe they are not entitled to the kind of rights that "proper" states have?

Actually, the germans could probably just turn off the electricity and water, then make their demands. I doubt Liechtenstein is viable as a stand alone entity for more than a couple of hours! They would probably have to start burning the money to keep themselves warm!

So have HMRC committed an offence?
Or should they report the transaction themslves - bit tricky as they are a supervising authority?
I don't really understand how they stand but it is a good question.
Do tell us David!

Isn't the receipt of stolen property a criminal offence?
How does this sit with the ML regulations?
Should we all now send a ML report to SOCA and who do we name on it - Dave Hartnett?

Are the UK taxpayers all criminals now that our money has been used in aiding and abetting the purchase of stolen property?

You don't just need to join a bank in a tax haven, any foreign bank will do, providing that it has UK residents as customers*. There is obviously no point joining a UK bank, as these will in the fullness of time all be persuaded to divulge account holders details, as we have seen with cases so far before the Special Commissioners.

*Mind you if you German customers look good too - I gather that its tax authorities pay well.

Looks like another interesting career option has opened up:

join a tax haven bank in the admin dept,
get access to account details of foreign individuals
copy them
flog them to foreign tax authorities for huge amounts of money

Seems fair enough to me.

And if I were an official in one of the investigating tax authorities using the Liechtenstein info, I would tell Crown Prince Alois (who has criticised these actions) to naff off. After all, if you and your countrymen act like a bunch of deaf dumb and blind monkeys when criminality in other countries is involved, why should you expect those other countries to have any regard for you? My understanding is that it is perfectly legal for HMRC to pay for info such as this. Whether the DVD itself could be used as criminal evidence is perhaps doubtful, but I guess they are not planning to rely on the DVD at all, but the other direct evidence they are able to uncover.