Help with tax evasion investigation.

James_B.

bluelass wrote: »

Do you honestly think being a casual DJ and first aider at events could earn this much in 18 months? if so I will pack my job in and do it I would be quids in!:T

Probably, yes.

I genuinely don't understand why you think it wrong to inform the authorities if someone has been failing to declare income.

Hopefully they'll get found out, and pay back what they owe, plus a decent penalty to cover the cost of the investigation.

shezza2

Spidernick wrote: »

All they can do is cooperate fully with the investigation, as that will be taken into consideration when the penalties added to the tax are considered. There is a lot of leeway around the level of penalties to be charged, so this is very important. There will be penalties, that is a given.

I'm afraid James_B is right and if the claims are true then this is a criminal act. If everyone paid the tax they should then the rest of us could (in theory) pay a lot less tax.

Oh if that was only true. Get a chance to screw the tax man, DO IT.

quietriot

shezza2 wrote: »

Oh if that was only true. Get a chance to screw the tax man, DO IT.

Except you're not screwing 'the tax man', you're screwing the people who rely on the money brought in to fund public services. Ask yourself, if tax revenues are down (whether due to evasion or another reason) are the resulting cuts more likely to affect the poor or the rich?

Your point of view is exceptionally immature and you should be ashamed of yourself for holding it.

James_B.

shezza2 wrote: »

[/COLOR]

Oh if that was only true. Get a chance to screw the tax man, DO IT.

I think that you maybe don't understand how this whole thing works. The "tax man" is not keeping your money for himself, it is going to pay for police, nurses, pensions, benefits, armed forces, and so on.

People like me pay far more tax than you ever will, and do it without trying to cheat the system. It is us who you are cheating when you defraud the system.

Of course, a dishonest attitude such as expressed above normally brings with it a life commensurate with what one deserves, so karma is, in some ways restored.

James_B.

quietriot wrote: »

Your point of view is exceptionally immature and you should be ashamed of yourself for holding it.

If you read their other posts, you can see full well where their morals have taken them. It's pretty much always the case.

keaton

purdyoaten wrote: »

Once HMRC have established good reason for an investigation, e.g. negligence of taxpayer, the time limits don't really exist. Twenty years was my record for a client - failure to declare an offshore bank account - I believe that this is regarded as a general maximum.

Is going back 20 years a regular thing? As the moonlighting DJ in this thread is classed as tax evasion on a deliberate level, is he likely to be looked back over 20 years?

purdyoaten

keaton wrote: »

Is going back 20 years a regular thing? As the moonlighting DJ in this thread is classed as tax evasion on a deliberate level, is he likely to be looked back over 20 years?

No it is not. However you did ask about HMRC powers, presumably believing that they are limited to four years. They are not- it is all relative to the severity of the case.

keaton

purdyoaten wrote: »

No it is not. However you did ask about HMRC powers, presumably believing that they are limited to four years. They are not- it is all relative to the severity of the case.

From what I understand its 20 years. I dont understood though if someone like the op's friend commits tax fraud and is given a determination bill of 35 k as has been mentioned (if we assume thisis a genuine letter) what if he cannot pay, he cannot wipe those out in banruptsy from my understanding as they are fraud. They would then take assets to the value of the sum, but what if he has no assets?

I know its a rather long winded theoretical question, but something that has occurred while reading this thread.

antonic

It sounds like its relating to this :

https://www.gov.uk/secondincomes

HMRC have gathered information from various sources and have identified that there is undeclared income.

They need to get this sorted , possibly through the services of a good recommended accountant.

They can be charged penalties & interest for the undeclared income and as others have said they MUST declare everything, if they dont they *MAY* end up in further trouble.

purdyoaten

keaton wrote: »

From what I understand its 20 years. I dont understood though if someone like the op's friend commits tax fraud and is given a determination bill of 35 k as has been mentioned (if we assume thisis a genuine letter) what if he cannot pay, he cannot wipe those out in banruptsy from my understanding as they are fraud. They would then take assets to the value of the sum, but what if he has no assets?

I know its a rather long winded theoretical question, but something that has occurred while reading this thread.

It is only in very extreme cases that HMRC will pursue criminal charges for fraud. There are various documents a taxpayer will have to sign before closure of the investigation, one being a declaration that there has been full disclosure. Even in the large case that I previously mentioned, which was carried out under Hansard, there was never any suggestion of criminal prosecution. I have come across this only once and that was for a third offence!