Channel 4 tonight 19:30

[Streetwalker]

HMRC staff have suffered massive cuts over the years.

https://www.ft.com/content/1f40926a-1fe3-11e5-ab0f-6bb9974f25d0

HMRC shows strain after 10 years of woes and losing 40% of staff

UK tax authority fears the effect of further spending cuts while introducing modernisation programme

Maybe a good year to throw in a creative tax return then . 

When its pointed out the nearest tax office is miles away I always thought that was the case anyway . My 'tax office' is Newcastle , I just assumed it was the same for everyone , they give you one at the other end of the country so they don't get personal visits . 

Oh well , what with Sadiq's new congestion zone I guess I had best 'buy' a new van 

[papasmurf]

Quite.

HMRC closed the offices and got rid of the quill pens. It did not mean that they got rid of the staff. 

HMRC staff have suffered massive cuts over the years.

https://www.ft.com/content/1f40926a-1fe3-11e5-ab0f-6bb9974f25d0

HMRC shows strain after 10 years of woes and losing 40% of staff

UK tax authority fears the effect of further spending cuts while introducing modernisation programme

[Borchester]

Fully staffed?  The nearest fully functioning DWP office to where I live  is now over 20 miles away and the nearest HMRC Office is over 100 miles away.

Quite.

HMRC closed the offices and got rid of the quill pens. It did not mean that they got rid of the staff. They are a bit like those odds and ends you tell us you can't find. They are there if you look.

However, as a general rule the the more remote the area the fewer jobs and the easier it is for HMRC to fill its ranks. 

[papasmurf]

As always Pappy, things are different in your world. I can only speak from thirty years experience of the Inland Revenue and later HMRC. But needless to say, you know more about these matters than anyone else.

The Inland Revenue shut down a lot of offices years ago. There are hardly any left.  I would have thought you knew that.

[Borchester]

Fully staffed?  The nearest fully functioning DWP office to where I live  is now over 20 miles away and the nearest HMRC Office is over 100 miles away.

As always Pappy, things are different in your world. I can only speak from thirty years experience of the Inland Revenue and later HMRC. But needless to say, you know more about these matters than anyone else.

[papasmurf]

 If you are in a village or small town and where the benefit  offices/ HMRC/ etc are fully staffed

Fully staffed?  The nearest fully functioning DWP office to where I live  is now over 20 miles away and the nearest HMRC Office is over 100 miles away.

[Borchester]

How many people do you think defraudthetax system and by how much?

Quite a lot and not by very much. As several posters have pointed out, it is largely anecdotal because if it was not as though fraudsters fill out annual returns and such.

The main point is not how much but where. If you are in a village or small town and where the benefit  offices/ HMRC/ etc are fully staffed and where the gig economy is not such a big thing, then it is easier to keep an eye on things. But in London, well, I have friends who run Indian restaurants and car washes and I am pretty sure that the staff are not reliant on their wages or feel the need to bother the DHS every time they do a cash in hand job.

[papasmurf]

How many people do you think defraudthetax system and by how much?

He is obviously ignorant of that despite the Pandora Papers. It isn't the numbers it is the amount £100 billion a year just in Britain. (The more that comes to light that is probably an underestimate.)

[cromwell]

I'm surprised people think over 1 person per hundred on the fiddle is acceptable, I certainly don't.
What do I propose? I propose the likes of Smurf recognise there is systemic fraud in the benefit system and stop blaming the government for everyone's hard luck story. 

How many people do you think defraudthetax system and by how much?

[papasmurf]

I'm surprised people think over 1 person per hundred on the fiddle is acceptable, I certainly don't.

It isn't even one person per hundred.   What is not acceptable to me are the mega tax evaders and mega spurious tax avoiders.
They make £1.2 billion look like small change. 

[Barry]

I'm surprised people think over 1 person per hundred on the fiddle is acceptable, I certainly don't.
What do I propose? I propose the likes of Smurf recognise there is systemic fraud in the benefit system and stop blaming the government for everyone's hard luck story. 

About 1 in 3 men have a criminal record, so 1% seems as if it is quite well controlled.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about benefit fraud, when, in the greater scheme of things, it is negligible.

[Nick]

The total benefits bill for the UK (excluding some items like state pensions) is over 100BN, so even if 1.3BN is fraudulently claimed, tha's just over 1% of the total. 

[highlight]What action do you propose[/highlight] - if your argument is that all disability benefits should be stopped because 1% of claimants might be fraudulent, I guess that means the 99% who really do need that help just have to rot at home?  Even if the real total of fraudulent claims is 10 times that figure, it's in my opinion still not a reason to stop all the benefits. 

If you are not claiming that, then what is your proposed solution?

Also - it's perfectly feasible for people on disability benefits, PIP and so on to have a gym membership - in fact, part of the benefit could be to pay for Gym because they can only do certain types of excercies requiring gym equipment for example.  This does not mean that their disability doesn't exist or that they are fit for any and all types of work.

I have also known one or two people who were claiming these benefits who in my opinion were playing the system, but I also know many who are not.

I'm surprised people think over 1 person per hundred on the fiddle is acceptable, I certainly don't. 
What do I propose? I propose the likes of Smurf recognise there is systemic fraud in the benefit system and stop blaming the government for everyone's hard luck story.  

[papasmurf]

Also - it's perfectly feasible for people on disability benefits, PIP and so on to have a gym membership - in fact, part of the benefit could be to pay for Gym because they can only do certain types of excercies requiring gym equipment for example.  This does not mean that their disability doesn't exist or that they are fit for any and all types of work.

Quite, free gym membership in some cases has been available to disabled people for therapeutic and rehabilitation reasons for many years now.

[Javert]

Benefit fraud in the U.K. at record level in 2021, up to £1.3bn, but you'd know that if you looked at the figures. I've never stated I know anything about DLA, but I know people who have been defrauding it for decades.

As for watching the CH 4 program, it was not available on Friday night, I will watch it tonight.

The total benefits bill for the UK (excluding some items like state pensions) is over 100BN, so even if 1.3BN is fraudulently claimed, tha's just over 1% of the total.  

What action do you propose - if your argument is that all disability benefits should be stopped because 1% of claimants might be fraudulent, I guess that means the 99% who really do need that help just have to rot at home?  Even if the real total of fraudulent claims is 10 times that figure, it's in my opinion still not a reason to stop all the benefits.  

If you are not claiming that, then what is your proposed solution?

Also - it's perfectly feasible for people on disability benefits, PIP and so on to have a gym membership - in fact, part of the benefit could be to pay for Gym because they can only do certain types of excercies requiring gym equipment for example.  This does not mean that their disability doesn't exist or that they are fit for any and all types of work.

I have also known one or two people who were claiming these benefits who in my opinion were playing the system, but I also know many who are not.

[srb7677]

£1.3bn in fraud

That sounds like a big amount and of course is on individual scales. But it is a tiny fraction of the total welfare budget, itself suggestive of the fact that most claims are not fraudulent. Many claimants are actually in work on low pay, many others are retired.