'illegal' mock-Tudor castle he tried to hide behind 40ft hay bales

SailorSam · 12 August 2016 at 12:41PM

N1AK wrote: »

Probably a lot less than it costs to pursue benefits cheats or big companies that illegally avoid taxes, but just like in those cases it's naive short term thinking not to pay it because the moment people know you won't pursue them for criminal behavior you'll get more of it.

This thread is about the farmer and his castle. If you'd like to talk about benefit cheats you'll find plenty of other threads on the forum dedicated to just that.

AdrianC · 12 August 2016 at 12:50PM

SailorSam wrote: »

This thread is about the farmer and his castle. If you'd like to talk about benefit cheats you'll find plenty of other threads on the forum dedicated to just that.

The reason for prosecuting breaches beyond the apparent direct cost-benefit return apply equally to both.

pour encourager les autres.

SailorSam · 12 August 2016 at 1:54PM

AdrianC wrote: »

The reason for prosecuting breaches beyond the apparent direct cost-benefit return apply equally to both.

pour encourager les autres.

Thanks Adrian, i understand now.
Is that the reason the Govt will spend more tracking down benefit cheats than they do tax cheats, even though they could make greater savings with the tax income they received ?
You don't need answer that question, it's more suited to a different thread.
One thread, one subject.