header-logo header-logo

08 January 2020
Issue: 7869 / Categories: Legal News , Tax
printer mail-detail

HMRC reveals hard core tax frauds

More than 600 individuals were convicted for tax crimes last year, HMRC has revealed

Notable perpetrators included two professionals who tried to steal £60m through a fraudulent tax avoidance HIV research investment scheme, and a charity treasurer who stole £330,000 in a Gift Aid repayment fraud. A Berkshire gang stole £34m in VAT and laundered £87m proceeds of illicit alcohol sales, while a former Top Gear mechanic helped father and son fraudsters flee the UK.

Simon York, director of the Fraud Investigation Service, said: ‘There remains a hard core who have zero interest in playing by the rules.’

Issue: 7869 / Categories: Legal News , Tax
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll