How could that have happened? How could HMRC have reached the point where it cannot chase that much tax? How limited are resources is this is the case?
By Richard Murphy, founder of the Tax Justice Network
“A TEMPORARY employment agency has gone into liquidation owing HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) £58 million in unpaid tax.
“Edinburgh-based Employ-E, a division of Legitas Group which is also in liquidation, is owned by lawyer David Allen, who is reported to own a golf course and mansion house in the Borders.
“Employ-E had about 60,000 low-paid temporary workers on its books, who it supplied to recruitment agencies throughout the UK.”
The real question here is, how could that have happened? How could HMRC have reached the point where it cannot chase that much tax? How limited are resources is this is the case?
There is also another question, which is, of course, where is the money? An agency should have been reimbursed all costs including tax. How could it lose that much money?
In the case of both questions surely HMRC should have been on top of this? If not I can only put it down to under-resourcing.
Left Foot Forward doesn't have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
71 Responses to “How can a company go bust owing £58 million in tax?”
Alec
You are an idiot. A truly ignorant idiot who cannot admit to a single error (and this was a whopper of a misreading) so continues compounding it in the hope everyone gives up in frustration.
LB
Meanwhile if you do a 45 hour week on a living wage, the state rakes in 5,289.35 in employment taxes from you.
And you’re worried about someone making a profit from helping people take home more money.
You’re angry because 15,000 people have managed to pay less tax.
You’ve a very distorted and disturbing view of the world.
As a guess, you’re dependent on the poor being taxed to buggery for a living, and the idea that the poor end up paying less tax you find threatening.
After all, no tax, you’re joining them in being poor.
LB
Still struggling eh?
Not one factually argument, so you resort to abuse.
Typical reaction when the left is found out. The right just tend to shut their mouths when they have been rumbled.
Alec
Now the lazy recourse to accusations of abusive lefties… you’re the one [claiming to] defending the welfare state and pensions. You are not very bright, are you?
~alec
LB
It’s more money.
Now, I’m in favour of them getting the 67 quid as well.
However you are arguing that this person should be stopped from offering a service that helps people get round the mad cap world of taxation.
You keep persisting in personal attacks because I’m in favour of the poor getting more.
eg. What about the 5K plus that the state takes from those who just earn a living wage? That puts them into poverty.
Not a comment. Nope, you’re too worried that they might be claiming back cash that they shouldn’t be paying tax on in the first place.
So I bet your a ‘public servant’ and you’ve got to get the poor paying thousands of pounds, or you will be out of a job, out of a pensions, and trying to get a job stacking shelves.
The state is making people poor. It’s the biggest contributor to poverty.
1. By taxing the poor 5K a year – numbers given, go check
2. By taking their pension contributions and spending them. End result, a piss poor pension compared to what they would have got by investing.
475K a year lost for a 26K a year worker – median wage.
Ah, yes, but you demand their money to make a living.