Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
A cat waiting by a smartphone | AccountingWEB | Taxpayers are being let down by poor HMRC service, says NAO
istock_Cat-smartphone_Asurobson

Taxpayers spent 798 years on hold to HMRC, says NAO

by

HMRC’s telephone and correspondence services have been falling below the expected service levels for too long, writes the National Audit Office in a new report that finds that taxpayers cumulatively spent 798 years on hold waiting to speak to an adviser. 

15th May 2024
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

The National Audit Office (NAO) has today released a new report which goes into detail about how taxpayers have been let down by poor HMRC customer service. 

The key facts at the front of the report make for grim reading, but are an all too familiar reality for taxpayers and agents. The main figure highlighted is that taxpayers and their agents spend a cumulative 798 years waiting to speak to an adviser in 2022/23 – a figure that has increased from 365 in 2019/20 and doesn’t include the time spent listening to automated messages. 

The report also found that those who got through to an adviser waited on average nearly 23 minutes in the first 11 months of 2023/24, up from five minutes in 2018/19. Then the time it takes to handle each call has increased on average from 11.24 minutes in 2019/20 to 13.48 minutes in 2022/23. It also reported that in 2022/23, advisers answered 20.5m calls, out of 38m call attempts.

Responding to the report Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said: “HMRC’s telephone and correspondence services have been below its target service levels for too long.

“While many of its digital services work well, they have not made enough of a difference to customers, some of whom have been caught in a declining spiral of service pressures and cuts. HMRC has also not achieved planned efficiencies.”

Will HMRC’s extra funding make any difference?

Before the release of the report, the Treasury somewhat took the wind out of the NAO’s sails after HMRC received £51m in funding at the start of this week to improve its customer service, particularly its phone lines which have been underperforming and have been a constant source of frustration for agents and taxpayers. 

While the extra funding has been welcomed by stakeholders across the accounting profession, they have also warned that £51m is a fraction of HMRC’s customer service budget and the Revenue’s current online services are not up to scratch. For context, the NAO report noted that the net cost of HMRC’s customer service directorate from 2022/23 was £881m.  

The report pinpoints the decline of HMRC’s customer service to 2019/20 and it only declined further during the pandemic. During this period only 45.5% of HMRC’s responses were provided within 15 days. The telephone services have continued to decline with HMRC answering just two-thirds of callers’ attempts to speak to an adviser in the first 11 months of 2023/24. 

The 2021 spending review only added to the problem, where HMRC was asked to make annual savings of £75m in customer services by 2024/25 – and HMRC doubled the required savings to £149m as a result of the government’s efficiency and savings review in 2022/23. 

Due to budgetary constraints, HMRC now needs to cut staff numbers by 14% in 2024/25, despite only achieving a 9% reduction between 2019/20 and 2023/24. 

Increasing the use of digital services

Despite the customer service cash injection, HMRC is pressing on with its efficiency-improving strategy of encouraging taxpayers and their agents to use its digital services to resolve queries. While more are using digital channels, HMRC advisers in personal tax are under increasing pressure from more taxpayers being brought into the tax system through fiscal drag, while the number of staff has reduced by 4%. 

HMRC’s plan is to encourage more taxpayers and agents to use digital services, where online services would resolve queries quickly and easily, while freeing staff to serve those that need additional help and cutting costs on telephone calls and correspondence. 

However, the report argued that HMRC has not done enough to raise awareness of its digital services, with just 29% of customers aware of the personal tax account or the business tax account and only 21% of taxpayers aware of the HMRC app in November 2022. 

Additionally, digital services are better suited to straightforward queries, with gaps remaining on what individuals can do online. For example, the NAO highlighted that customers still need to call or write to split a personal allowance between two or more different employments or pensions. 

So far the move towards digital services has not relieved the strain on traditional services, where the quality of service has declined. The report found that performance has fallen below expected levels for telephone and correspondence for almost all of the past five years, and HMRC does not expect to meet its telephone performance target in 2024/25. 

The report goes on to say that HMRC has not set out when customers can expect performance to return to target levels. “With the prospect of this under-performance continuing, there is a risk the targets become meaningless.” 

Before HMRC reversed plans on closing its self assessment helpline for six months to address funding pressures and the backlog of queries, the Revenue forecasted that if it delivered the changes successfully, it would come close to its target of clearing 80% of correspondence in 15 working days. Despite this, only 65–70% of callers would get through to an adviser, which was still below the 85% target.  

“HMRC now faces a significant challenge without increasing capacity. Its approach to cutting services as it introduces new digital solutions has been too aggressive,” the NAO outlined in the report’s conclusion. 

“HMRC needs to allow more time for new services to bed in, understand the difference they make, and then make staff reductions when the benefits are demonstrated. Otherwise, services will continue to suffer, and unnecessary service pressures and contact will remain.”

Recommendations

The NAO recommends that HMRC develops more realistic plans for cutting the services. As such, it said HMRC should reassess what levels of customer service performance are needed to achieve value for money. 

For future spending reviews, the NAO said HMRC should only plan to realise staff reductions from changes to its digital services once improvements have taken effect. 

HMRC is also advised to take a more customer-oriented approach to encourage the take-up of new services. This includes investing in raising awareness of digital services and developing a plan to support taxpayers, with adequate alternatives for those that cannot be dealt with through a self-serve channel. 

The report also pushes for HMRC to reduce avoidable and expensive forms of contact. For example, the NAO suggests increasing opportunities for customers to send correspondence and documentation through secure electronic networks and identify and apply learning from the implementation of its digital projects.

HMRC must listen to the frustrations

Caroline Miskin, Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) senior technical manager of digital taxation, said the report raises valuable insight into the depth and scale of HMRC’s customer service problems. 

“With more than two-thirds of HMRC customer service demand due to errors, delays and failures in processes, this report also makes it clear that HMRC overestimated the budget reductions it could achieve. HMRC’s budget has come under further pressure because of wrongly assumed improvements in staff sickness levels and more efficient use of staff time, along with increased length of calls, IT outages and inflation.

“Things simply can’t continue as they are at HMRC without consequences for tax collection, and more inefficiency costs falling on taxpayers and agents.”

She added: “The additional funding of £51m announced on Monday should help to alleviate the current situation but it will be some months before the impact of that will be seen and it does not address the need to improve digital services.”

Meg Hillier MP, chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and frequent critic of HMRC, said the Revenue’s performance in picking up the phone has hit an all-time low. 

“Its digital by default approach is trying to force customers to engage online. But customers spent a total of 798 years waiting to speak to an adviser in 2022/23, more than double the amount in 2019/20. This shows there is still strong demand for a telephone service and that it is not good enough.

“HMRC must hear the frustration of taxpayers and make more realistic plans to improve.”

Replies (48)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By taxdigital
15th May 2024 06:55

Meanwhile HMRC have said:

“Millions more people used our highly rated online services last year — saving them waiting on the phone and freeing up our advisers to deal with those people who need extra support,” (FT).

So, unless surgically removed from their chairs the HMRC leadership is likely to continue as ever and we, the tax agents and advisers to suffer. We got a response (albeit technical) from HMRC last week after 4 years agreeing to what we said 4 years ago. An overpayment relief claim was rejected after two years advising us that we need file an ‘overpayment relief claim’!

Thanks (5)
Replying to taxdigital:
By JCresswellTax
15th May 2024 10:23

'Highly rated services' (wheres the laughing emjoi).

Their services are so basic its unbelievable!

Thanks (3)
Replying to JCresswellTax:
avatar
By rjmannaca
17th May 2024 09:34

We got the same response to an overpayment relief claim, after over a year's wait.

We made the mistake of mentioning in the letter that we had already amended the year that was in time, so this claim was just for the earlier periods. Their reply simply said we were too late to amend the earlier years so would have to submit an overpayment relief claim - unbelievable.

As far as I am concerned; it just shows that HMRC have insufficiently trained staff; in too much of a hurry to deal with correspondence; who look for the slightest excuse to simply return the letter ( TICK - "I've dealt with the correspondence" ); whereas it would be quicker overall for HMRC and us if they simply took the time to actually read the whole letter in the first place.

Luckily a phone call with someone who understood the issue, resulted in them accepting that the original letter was an overpayment relief claim and it was flagged for reworking - with a file note that this is an overpayment relief claim - otherwise they may have treated any new letter as being out of time for the earlier years, wasting yet more time and money arguing about the issue.

Thanks (0)
Replying to taxdigital:
avatar
By FactChecker
15th May 2024 12:51

“Millions more people used our highly rated online services last year”
... leaving aside how 'highly rated' is defined and by who, this is yet another of those totally unquantified soundbites so beloved of HMRC.

'millions more' ... as in 5 people 2 years ago, but 1,000,005 last year?
how many online services were available 2 years ago and then last year?

More importantly, have online 'accesses' led to a reduction in attempted phone-calls?
Or are the attempted phone-calls also increasing alongside the online attempts?

Indeed are there any statistics for how many of the online accesses were deemed successful (by the taxpayer not by HMRC) - or can we assume that, like phone-calls, there is a poor 'resolution rate' (despite being on typically simpler topics)?

Thanks (3)
Replying to FactChecker:
Morph
By kevinringer
15th May 2024 13:09

FactChecker wrote:

Indeed are there any statistics for how many of the online accesses were deemed successful (by the taxpayer not by HMRC) - or can we assume that, like phone-calls, there is a poor 'resolution rate' (despite being on typically simpler topics)?

When the "customer" ends the webchat they are asked to complete the following survey. I assume stats are compiled from these surveys.

Were you able to do what you needed to do today?
o Yes
o No

How easy was it?
o Very easy
o Easy
o Neither easy nor difficult
o Difficult
o Very difficult

Overall, how did you feel about the service you received today?
o Very satisfied
o Satisfied
o Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
o Dissatisfied
o Very dissatisfied

Why did you give these scores?

How would you prefer to get in touch with HMRC?
o Online webchat with HMRC adviser
o Social media messaging (such as, WhatsApp and Twitter)
o Phone
o Other

Thanks (0)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By FactChecker
15th May 2024 17:09

"I assume stats are compiled from these surveys"
... well I can't find them (a full set not just the odd vaguely phrased 'stat' extracted and then quoted in the middle of a response to PAC or whatever).

Which suggests EITHER they are not properly compiled for public consumption, OR they are not published (due to the story they would tell).

Not sure which is more dispiriting ... but it illustrates yet another fundamental misunderstanding in the minds of HMRC senior personnel.
The point of quality and satisfaction metrics is not as input to PR/marketing exercises, but to provide the basis for learning about where and how performance needs to be improved.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By GHarr497688
15th May 2024 10:03

So Harra continues in office despite being criticised for MTD failures , over spending , helpline issues plus a host of other failings. HMRC staff remain working from home I believe and the whole tax system is on its knees and yet MTD ploughs ahead even though no one wants or needs it. Can anyone explain why no one does anything apart from publish reports saying what wrong while Harra and his team say all is fine and MTD will solve all the problems. No logic , no common sense and no resolution. Money can't fix everything and the MP's need to realise this.

Thanks (5)
Replying to GHarr497688:
Tornado
By Tornado
16th May 2024 13:26

"yet MTD ploughs ahead even though no one wants or needs it."

My view here is that none of my clients will be taking part in MTD for ITSA unless all aspects of the system are thoroughly tested and are proven to be fit for for purpose. HMRC might try to mandate MTD for ITSA, but they cannot force us to use systems that are not up to the job.

It seems highly unlikely that MTD for ITSA will ever be fit for purpose.

End of story really.

Thanks (1)
Ivor Windybottom
By Ivor Windybottom
15th May 2024 10:03

On another thread a wise person suggested HMRC should operate a ticketed help desk, like most support functions. If this was a digital system we would be able to see progress on the item by tracking the ticket. This would provide a better joined up way of dealing with matters and could significantly reduce both telephone contact and post.

And so my unrealised dreams go on............................................................................................. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Thanks (6)
Replying to Ivor Windybottom:
avatar
By WhiteRose
15th May 2024 14:03

I tried to use the webchat this morning - it tells you how long you are going to have to wait and it ticks down, so in a sense this is a ticketing system. All well and good, I was happy to carry on doing other tasks while I waited for the connection but... it got to three minutes and then never progressed any further.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By ourpetsheadsarefallingoff
15th May 2024 10:07

I was having some success with using the online advisers earlier in the year, but this week it keeps saying there are none available. Currently 35 minutes into my first hold of the day.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By groundy
15th May 2024 10:11

10 attempts to call HMRC agent dedicated line this week and on 9 occasions I was cut off after 2 minutes as too busy to accept call (2 occasions called at 8am when they open) on the one occasion I got into the queue system I was cut off after 30 minutes on hold.
Finally, rang General helpline who answered after 30 minutes.
HMRC are not fit for purpose and I can't believe nothing at the top is being done to rectify simple things like answering a phone. God help us all if they continue to push ahead with MTD.

Thanks (6)
Replying to groundy:
avatar
By Homeworker
16th May 2024 11:45

Are they prioritising the public helpline over the ADL now? If the public are only waiting on average 33 minutes then they must be, as my average wait time on the ADL is nearly an hour and two of those attempts were abandoned after an hour.

Thanks (0)
By SteveHa
15th May 2024 10:18

I'm astounded that the target for answering calls at the UK's tax authority, who are responsible for assessing and collecting taxes used to fund the whole bloody country is just 85%.

In 23/24, according to HMRC's own stats, they answered 38M calls. This means that more than 6,000,000 calls went unanswered (if the target had been met - it wasn't, and so the unanswered calls is likely much higher). That's a shocking target and statistic.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By euanjohn
15th May 2024 10:20

Nothing is going to change until there is new management at HMRC and a totally different culture. They are working in ways that an averagely intelligent 12 year old would find incomprehensible. I submitted a formal complaint in February about failure of the R & D tax credit department to respond to letters and emails. This month I chased up a response only to be told that my complaint had been sent to the R & D department to be dealt with. With gritted teeth I asked the woman to imagine a situation in which she had been ill-treated by a police officer, she had complained to his Chief Constable, only to find that the complaint has been referred back to the very officer she had been complaining about. I am retiring from practice at the end of this year, I can't stand dealing with these brainless idiots who treat taxpayers and their agents with undisguised contempt, while publishing standards with which they expect those very agents to emulate.

Thanks (4)
avatar
By JustAnotherUser
15th May 2024 11:37

almost as long as we've waited for MTD /s

Thanks (0)
Morph
By kevinringer
15th May 2024 12:08

"However, the report argued that HMRC has not done enough to raise awareness of its digital services..."

I have been trying to use the webchat before the ADL, but more often than not webchat says "our advisers are not available to discuss your query at the moment". So the webchat is inadequately resourced even at current user loadings. If HMRC were to raise awareness, it would increase demand further and make this poor service even worse.

Thanks (2)
Morph
By kevinringer
15th May 2024 12:12

"... taxpayers and their agents spend a cumulative 798 years waiting to speak to an adviser in 2022/23 – a figure that has increased from 365 in 2019/20 and doesn’t include the time spent listening to automated messages."

"... those who got through to an adviser waited on average nearly 23 minutes in the first 11 months of 2023/24, up from five minutes in 2018/19. Then the time it takes to handle each call has increased on average from 11.24 minutes in 2019/20 to 13.48 minutes in 2022/23."

So were comparing poor pre-2020 service levels with dreadful post-2020 service levels.

Q. What happened in 2020?
A. Covid.

Q. Why hasn't HMRC recovered?
A. Working From Home.

Q. How can HMRC fix this problem?
A. Stop Working From Home.

Thanks (4)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By JustAnotherUser
15th May 2024 13:16

where does it mention working from home is the cause?

"declining spiral of service pressures and cuts"

"The 2021 spending review only added to the problem, where HMRC was asked to make annual savings of £75m in customer services by 2024/25"

... working from hoem reduces overheads, quite the cost saving exercise.

"and HMRC doubled the required savings to £149m as a result of the government’s efficiency and savings review in 2022/23"

"Due to budgetary constraints, HMRC now needs to cut staff numbers by 14% in 2024/25, despite only achieving a 9% reduction between 2019/20 and 2023/24. "

"more taxpayers being brought into the tax system through fiscal drag, while the number of staff has reduced by 4%."

As per HMRCs own words... "Where they (employees) are based is completely irrelevant.'"

And a quick google search... "Others suggest HMRC's home-working policy since the pandemic has slowed processes down, which is unproven."

An HMRC spokesman told This is Money: 'All our staff here are held to the same standards whether they are working from an HMRC building or from home.

and

The declining numbers of staff, which has occurred at the same time as the digitisation programme, seems to be the core issue though

So no, WFH is not the cause, the cause here is more services needing heads since the pandemic, cost cutting and retention and a failed move to digital, throw in the billiosn over budget MTD and you just have crap management.

Thanks (0)
Replying to JustAnotherUser:
Morph
By kevinringer
15th May 2024 13:32

It doesn't mention anywhere in the report that WFH is the problem. But if you listen to HMRC, there aren't any problems anyway. I site WFH from experience. HMRC ADL staff in call centres have told me they have 3 monitors and load each with items relevant to the call so that they can handle calls efficiently. HMRC WFH staff tell me they have a single laptop monitor and therefore can see much less info than their office-based colleagues which means WFH staff have to spend extra time switching between pages of information and waiting for these to load. WFH staff I speak to often experience slow connection speeds and occasionally have to reboot when I'm on the call. All this is down to technology. WFH staff suffer from the consequences of isolation. Because of the technical nature of agent calls, inexperienced staff may have to consult a colleague. That's easy if they're in the office, but WFH staff have to input questions into yet another page in their software and wait for responses. I've had occasions when I've had to wait with the WFH ADL call handler 20 minutes for the call handler to receive an internal response to their query, sometimes responses are not forthcoming and the call handler gives up.

Thanks (2)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By JustAnotherUser
15th May 2024 13:45

My citations come from HMRC spokespersons, and also experience. Not one of these issues above is unfixable if true. A lot of the tech issues are related to cost (an extra monitor) my 'experience' is that any decent tech company during pandemic allowed home workers to take equipment or even shipped it, an extra monitor is peanuts. Alas, HMRC have to cut costs.

"consult a colleague. That's easy if they're in the office" again, experience.... chat is a thing, and instant, so is hold, walking about looking for help takes a lot more time. This ones a reach.

Every article on the matter talks about cost cutting, failure to convert to digital, more work for people and increased work for a team that is shrinking … but lets blame WFH :)

Thanks (1)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By usedbyhmrc
15th May 2024 17:22

If someone is working from home, they have the option of being supplied free of charge with an additional monitor, so it's personal choice if they want to just use their laptop.

Thanks (0)
Morph
By kevinringer
15th May 2024 12:16

"It also reported that in 2022/23, advisers answered 20.5m calls, out of 38m call attempts."

So HMRC only answered 53.9% of calls.

"The telephone services have continued to decline with HMRC answering just two-thirds of callers’ attempts to speak to an adviser in the first 11 months of 2023/24."

Uh? Isn't 66.7% in 2023-24 an improvement compared to 53.9% in 2022-23? Or should I say, 2023-24 is less bad compared to 2022-23.

Thanks (1)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By usedbyhmrc
15th May 2024 17:30

For all those with rose tinted glasses, it was just as bad 15 years ago.
https://www.taxation.co.uk/articles/2010-01-15-19834-taxman-failing-hand...

Thanks (0)
Replying to usedbyhmrc:
Morph
By kevinringer
15th May 2024 17:43

Were the queue wait times 15 years ago as long as today? Did HMRC terminate the call because they were too busy?

Thanks (2)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By usedbyhmrc
15th May 2024 21:28

It was different technology then, but yes they did, but not as often as not as many callers were allowed to queue. As for wait times I can well remember getting an earful of abuse when someone had queued for 6 minutes during my brief tenure as an adviser, 2007-2010

Thanks (0)
Replying to usedbyhmrc:
RLI
By lionofludesch
15th May 2024 17:49

usedbyhmrc wrote:

For all those with rose tinted glasses, it was just as bad 15 years ago.
https://www.taxation.co.uk/articles/2010-01-15-19834-taxman-failing-hand...

I think we need to go back a bit further than 15 years to find something acceptable - let alone decent.

I would say the rot set in as soon as the decision was taken to close local offices.

Thanks (4)
RLI
By lionofludesch
15th May 2024 12:52

I'm amazed by this news.

I thought it'd be more.

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
15th May 2024 14:39

They seem to game the stats.

once you hit about 40 minutes on hold, I swear they dont answer so it goes down as a "failed" call rather than hit their average call waiting time.

The average all waiting time of course omit the lenghty durge at the start which adds between 2 and 3 minutes to the call.

Thanks (0)
Profile
By indomitable
15th May 2024 13:29

"HMRC’s telephone and correspondence services have been falling below the expected service levels for too long, writes the National Audit Office in a new report that finds that taxpayers cumulatively spent 798 years on hold waiting to speak to an adviser. "

Now there's a surprise a quasi body stating the b****y obvious. Nothing will change. This country is declining by the minute! And that's all the civil service - NOTHING WORKS.

Thanks (1)
Replying to indomitable:
avatar
By moneymanager
15th May 2024 13:51

The country isn't 'declining', it is under a slow but steady controlled demolition and at all levels and areas.

Thanks (0)
Replying to indomitable:
avatar
By Tom+Cross
15th May 2024 16:06

Allegedly, I read this week, there are 500,000 civil servants employed in the UK.
It wouldn't matter which political party is elected, at the next election, the civil service still, effectively operate the country.
Therefore, why is anyone surprised that we're going down the pan, faster than United Utilities can float sewage, into Windermere.
Time for the men in grey suits style of governance, to be radically overhauled.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tom+Cross:
RLI
By lionofludesch
15th May 2024 16:13

Tom+Cross wrote:

Allegedly, I read this week, there are 500,000 civil servants employed in the UK.
It wouldn't matter which political party is elected, at the next election, the civil service still, effectively operate the country.
Therefore, why is anyone surprised that we're going down the pan, faster than United Utilities can float sewage, into Windermere.
Time for the men in grey suits style of governance, to be radically overhauled.

They've always run the country. They used to run it better.

We actually need more career civil servants. People who know their job.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By moneymanager
15th May 2024 13:49

If we are 'customers', can I please use the alternative, HMRC's concept of service is beyond laughable.

Thanks (2)
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
15th May 2024 14:44

There used to be a time when you could call HMRC, and they fixed stuff, whilst you were on the phone.

For example, changed tax codes, gave out information about tax payers income, issued refunds, registered clients for PAYE or self assessment.

Now we have phone low level call handlers at HMRC / refer to black hole / wait / call up to see if its done / refer to black hole / wait on repeat until they do it, or dont do it, and we go in for a round of compaints.

All of which chews up considerably more time for everyone, HMRC included.

The simple act for telling us when they HAVENT done something would be a huge start. Eg if you send in an application to register for SA and it fails, TELL US, and more importantly WHY. Its so flipping simple, I dont see why HMRC cant do it. Same for refunds. WHY are you rejecting it? Just tell us you have looked at it, and rejected it, and why, and we will fix the issue, not just keep on trying the same thing. Its really basic process stuff.

Currently staff in HMRC with a job list must find a huge % has already been actioned, or been rejested severla times and failed several times. Not only is that a massive waste of resources HMRC's end, but its hugely demotivating to staff.

Thanks (5)
Replying to ireallyshouldknowthisbut:
Morph
By kevinringer
15th May 2024 15:10

Spot on.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By kim.shaw-and-co.com
15th May 2024 19:47

What's needed is a compensation system set up to transfer liability for wasted agent and taxpayer time when issues are not resolved in a reasonable time to the organization responsible.

Add up the bill for that and there would be a compelling case for demanding internal change, starting at the top ....

Thanks (0)
Replying to kim.shaw-and-co.com:
Morph
By kevinringer
16th May 2024 09:23

Agreed, but even at NMW rates of £11.44/hour, the 7 million hours queuing (see https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/hmrc-customer-service.pdf) = £80 million.

This report raises a question: it cost HMRC £881 million to supply 4.7 million hours of customer service. That's a cost of £187 per hour. But we know from reports in the media HMRC call handlers are paid £13 per hour (https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/index.cgi?SID=dXNlcnNlYX... £25,082 pa). HMRC's non-staff costs must therefore amount to £174 an hour = 93% of the cost. I wonder how this compares to private sector call handlers.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By neiltonks
16th May 2024 08:41

In my experience, the average wait time of 23 minutes compares favourably with the helplines operated by many private sector organisations!

Thanks (0)
Replying to neiltonks:
Morph
By kevinringer
16th May 2024 09:44

Firstly, if HMRC actually answered the phone after 23 minutes it would be a vast improvement compared to actual wait times (47 minutes this morning, which is the shortest queue time I've experienced for a long time). Secondly, if we don't like private sector queue times, we can take our business to another supplier, but HMRC have a monopoly.

Thanks (0)
Morph
By kevinringer
16th May 2024 09:07

Richard, the NAO link in your article goes to a report dated 16 Jul 2013.

Thanks (0)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By JB101
16th May 2024 09:45

Think yourself lucky it isn't a link to a report by HMRC. It would be dated 15 May 1226!

Thanks (1)
avatar
By johnjenkins
17th May 2024 10:58

HMRC services down again today.

Thanks (0)
Replying to johnjenkins:
Morph
By kevinringer
17th May 2024 11:28

Yes, I've been trying SA webchat but it keeps saying:

'Our advisers are not available to discuss your query at the moment.'

Thanks (0)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By johnjenkins
17th May 2024 12:55

They are all down the west end spending the £51M.

Thanks (0)
Replying to johnjenkins:
RLI
By lionofludesch
17th May 2024 13:24

johnjenkins wrote:

HMRC services down again today.

Yeah, they want to stop the waiting time going over 800 years.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Mr J Andrews
19th May 2024 09:34

By my reckoning , Mehusalah should get through in 171 years.

Thanks (1)
paddle steamer
By DJKL
20th May 2024 13:34

How many taxpayers?

Suspect I can account for the 8 years, which of you make up the other 790 ?

Thanks (0)