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

TAX NEWS: Aggression beats measured at HMRC. By Dan Martin

by
20th Jul 2006
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

The traditional aggressive mentality of Customs & Excise has triumphed over the more measured approach of the Inland Revenue in the merged HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), new research claims.

Research by the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) found 89% of respondents believed the merged body was more aggressive than the old Revenue.

Only 10% thought HMRC was an improvement on its predecessor bodies, while nearly 80% complained dealing with the merger organisations has been more complicated than previously.

Released a day after HMRC executive chairman Sir David Varney announced he is to step down to take up a new post as an adviser to Gordon Brown, the research revealed that 42% of accountants believed the complexity of investigations has increased since HMRC's creation. Only 7% said it had reduced.

ACCA's Chas Roy-Chowdhury said: "The Revenue was always seen as taking a more reasoned approach to taxpayers than Customs, with its history of tackling smuggling, and its powers of investigation and arrest. ACCA warned at the time of the merger that the more assertive culture would win out and so it seems has been the case.

"While Sir David Varney did a good job in many ways overseeing the complex transition from two bodies into one, it is essential that his successor at HMRC takes action to ensure that customer service is at the top of the organisation's agenda, and that taxpayers are treated fairly.

"99% of businesses are just trying to cope with an over-complex tax system and have no time to indulge in esoteric tax avoidance schemes. HMRC must remember this."

The poll also showed that very specific and often technical issues irritate accountants, with frequent feedback about Form 64-8s - authorisation forms signed by a taxpayer for a particular agent to act on his/her behalf. One respondent called the Form 64-8 system "a fiasco", while others said the documents were getting lost by HMRC and disappearing in their systems.

When asked "what is HMRC already good at doing?", ACCA said negative comments outweighed the positive. They ranged from: "nothing ' it's an utter shambles" to "helpful and prompt with any queries".

Roy-Chowdhury added: "HMRC wants to increase the use of on-line filing for tax self-assessment. If this is to happen, then its systems and processes need to be spotless. But mistakes can and do occur ' and the willingness of HMRC to listen and consult is an imperative for the future."

Tags:

Replies (2)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By AnonymousUser
21st Jul 2006 11:44

LOL

it is essential that his successor at HMRC takes action to ensure that customer service is at the top of the organisation's agenda, and that taxpayers are treated fairly.

In your dreams, mate.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By wdr
21st Jul 2006 14:25

Assertion is now repalcing reasoned argument time and again
As a hewer of wood and drawer of water I have seen a steady deterioration in the intellectual effort applied by HMRC.

Long letters asserting the law to be what the Inspector thinks it should be, perhaps joined with a statement some other poor howdow accounatnt has agreed with his assertion, is considered proof of the argument.

Another verion is that if our argument is right, then the Revenue would have to reopen other cases and is taken as proof that HMRC are right in their argument.

Quotation of the Revenue' Manuals as proof of the argument is another problem, perhaps joined withn a threat to reopen other years if we persist in a reasoned alternative analysis.

'Bad loser' syndrome is yet another problem which seems to be rearing its head.

Dragging out cases where the Revenue amy have to argue in front of the Commissioners, relying on the fact that smaller businessmen can't afford to wait is another 'bullyboy' tactic.

The latest exchange in one matter is a four month delay in responding to our last letter, together with a demand for a response within 30 days to HMRC's belated and hopelssly amateurish reply. Needless to say our response was in their hands in seven days.
Etc , etc.

Thanks (0)