Tax Evasion Could Lead To 20 Year Jail Terms?

MacMickster

Benefit cheats are to face increased prison sentences of up to 10 years, under new guidelines set out by the director of public prosecutions.

Keir Starmer QC said it was time for a "tough stance" on benefit and tax credit fraud, as he issued the guidance for prosecutors in England and Wales.

He said the £1.9bn annual cost of the crime to the nation should always be at the "forefront of lawyers" minds.

It was a myth "getting one over" on the system was a victimless crime, he said.

Given that the Tax Gap (the estimate of the difference between tax due if correctly declared and paid, and the amount actually collected) is over £30 billion, sureley Keir Starmer will be calling for even higher sentences for tax evaders than benefit fraudsters - won't he?

antrobus

MacMickster wrote: »

Given that the Tax Gap (the estimate of the difference between tax due if correctly declared and paid, and the amount actually collected) is over £30 billion, sureley Keir Starmer will be calling for even higher sentences for tax evaders than benefit fraudsters - won't he?

Why?

Under the Fraud Act 2006 the maximum sentence for fraud is 10 years. Fraud is fraud, whether the sum involved is £5 or £5 million; it's the same crime.

Loughton_Monkey

To commit fraud is an "irregular verb".

• Benefit and tax credit fraud is the deliberate seizing of taxpayer funds to which one is not entitled. It should carry a high penalty.
• Tax fraud by individuals is a mistake of absent-minded hard working professionals who cannot be expected to learn the myriad of tax laws. Culprits should be slapped on the wrist and treated for amnesia.
• Tax fraud by corporations is a creative and wealth-creating enterprise performed best by large, profitable, international entrepreneurs. They should be encouraged to operate from UK rather than Zurich.

wymondham

10 years is long time. People have had less for manslaughter??

chewmylegoff

antrobus wrote: »

Why?

Under the Fraud Act 2006 the maximum sentence for fraud is 10 years. Fraud is fraud, whether the sum involved is £5 or £5 million; it's the same crime.

Agree. The CPS has traditionally prosecuted benefit cheats using one of the iterations of the social security act rather than the fraud act. The call is for the fraud act to be used so that the higher max sentence is available for severe cases and as an additional deterrent.

It's worth noting that whilst fraud act offences carry a maximum tariff of 10 years, even multimillion pound frauds do not often attract the maximum penalty. I can't think of anyone who has ever received 10 years for fraud off the top of my head. The reality is that if madoff had been prosecuted here he might have got 10 years, but if someone was prosecuted for £10k of benefit fraud (or any other fraud) they would be unlikely to receive a custodial sentence unless there were significant aggravating factors.

Benefit fraudsters aren't going to go to jail for 10 years regardless of which act they are prosecuted under unless they are involved in some form of organised crime (e.g. Mass claiming of benefits on behalf of dead people or something like that).

MacMickster

antrobus wrote: »

Why?

Under the Fraud Act 2006 the maximum sentence for fraud is 10 years. Fraud is fraud, whether the sum involved is £5 or £5 million; it's the same crime.

Not quite. Tax evaders can be charged with the common law offence of cheating the public revenue, which has no maximum sentence. I believe that the longest sentence ever actually handed down for this was 17 years, with the possibility of an additional 10 years if assets weren't surrendered.

markharding557

No government of any colour will ever target tax evasion because they would be targeting themselves.

antrobus

MacMickster wrote: »

Not quite. Tax evaders can be charged with the common law offence of cheating the public revenue, which has no maximum sentence. I believe that the longest sentence ever actually handed down for this was 17 years, with the possibility of an additional 10 years if assets weren't surrendered.

Well,

(1) the existence of an alternative criminal charge doesn't change the fact that fraud is fraud in terms of the Fraud Act 2006

(2) the common law offence of cheating the public revenue applies equally well to benefit fraudsters as it does to tax fraudsters

MacMickster

antrobus wrote: »

Well,

(1) the existence of an alternative criminal charge doesn't change the fact that fraud is fraud in terms of the Fraud Act 2006

Just as murder may well involve assault and GBH as well, but prosecutors tend not to charge people with these additional crimes carrying a lower sentence.

My initial point still stands. If the Director of Public Prosecutions wants (quite rightly) to see bigger sentences of up to 10 years given to those who fiddle benefits, and the cost to the public purse of this offence to be at the forefront of people's minds, then surely he should be at least equally concerned about tax evasion, seeking sentences proportionate to those for benefit fraud dependent on the amounts involved.

Incidentally, the 17 year sentence that I referred to earlier was for a £176 million fraud, which would make most benefit frauds pale into insignificance. In fact it is 9% of the total annual loss to benefit fraud.

JencParker

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

To commit fraud is an "irregular verb".

• Benefit and tax credit fraud is the deliberate seizing of taxpayer funds to which one is not entitled. It should carry a high penalty.
• Tax fraud by individuals is a mistake of absent-minded hard working professionals who cannot be expected to learn the myriad of tax laws. Culprits should be slapped on the wrist and treated for amnesia.
• Tax fraud by corporations is a creative and wealth-creating enterprise performed best by large, profitable, international entrepreneurs. They should be encouraged to operate from UK rather than Zurich.

So if you're poor there should be a high penalty. If you are a high earner, then you are a poor misfortunate and it's not your fault so only deserve a slap on the wrist. And if you are a company then it's good business!

Why am in not surprised to hear such things from members of this forum...rolls eyes....

This attitude sums up a large part of everything that is wrong with this country.

dryhat

The whole financial system runs on fraud, theft and corruption with London at its centre.
Benefit fraud pales into insignificance compared to the amounts being stolen from ordinary people day in and day out.

If we had severely punished the major players in this global racket back in 2008 we would be well on the way to recovery now.