[Invermarnoch]

Hmm. When you are expecting to have to pay tax of significant amounts, surely accountants are involved? Chartered accountants often give a certificate to HMRC stating their satisfaction or otherwise with the information provided by their client. It is now being suggested that Zahawi has paid a penalty of seven figures to HMRC. Does this mean he withheld information from his accountants or that he will be suing them for negligence?

 

[mows]

I was thinking the same.

 

[mows]

I was thinking the same.

 

[williegunn2]

Does this mean he withheld information from his accountants or that he will be suing them for negligence?

Rumour has it he was "moonlighting" as a gillie somewhere in the Hebrides.

 

[Oscar]

Either way, making an honest error is one thing, making a £5m error is quite another!

 

[chriswjx]

What I find mind boggling, is that he claims that the error was "careless" not deliberate. Total reported sum is £4.8m, which includes a ca 30% penalty - so tax of approximately £3.7m was in dispute.

Would be a dream had enough dosh lying about that I could be "careless" with enough of it that just the tax on it is £3.7m... Taking the people for fools, and yet plenty out there who will believe it or just accept it.

 

[Birkin]

Either way, making an honest error is one thing, making a £5m error is quite another!

That depends on the size of the business.
In my time running my own business I had two tax visits and two vat visits and they managed to find errors in my returns which I paid on three occasions and had a tax refund on the other. I used an accountant for my returns who used an accounting program that did not show up the errors that were find by HMRC.
I was not an accountant and neither is Zahawi.

 

[Birkin]

What I find mind boggling, is that he claims that the error was "careless" not deliberate. Total reported sum is £4.8m, which includes a ca 30% penalty - so tax of approximately £3.7m was in dispute.

Would be a dream had enough dosh lying about that I could be "careless" with enough of it that just the tax on it is £3.7m... Taking the people for fools, and yet plenty out there who will believe it or just accept it.

He did not claim that the error was careless. These were the words used by HMRC.

 

[mows]

He did not claim that the error was careless. These were the words used by HMRC.

Did they?
It was claimed they said that.

Any one actually seen it?.

 

[Safranfoer]

'Careless' came from him, not HMRC - though it must have been via them, as the alternative is 'deliberate', and that's a criminal offence, which we would know about. I'm interested in seeing how thoroughly HMRC investigated him. No doubt it will come out in the wash. But it is very difficult to 'carelessly' register shares offshore, and also hard to mindlessly divide up shares, equitably. Conversations were surely had between him and his father. Registering shares offshore is a PITA. If it was 'careless' in not taking advice - that's not a good look for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. If we're being picky, you want the person with their hands on the cheque book to have a bit of financial nous. It's Johnson all over again: I did not know my actual house was party central during lockdown. Do you think we're idiots? Or are we supposed to accept that the people in charge are?

I guess between the public thinking he's a criminal or an idiot, Zahawi chose idiot. It's a bit of a Hobson's choice.

 

[tenet]

Careless in the context of Zahawi is a term used be HMRC:
"What is a careless error HMRC?
If your error is careless, it basically means that you meant to give correct information to HMRC, but made a mistake. HMRC recognise that reasonable care can differ from person to person – it has to take into account a particular person's abilities and
circumstances.10 Jun 2022"

 

[tenet]

I imagine that he was advised to enter some form of sophisticated tax avoidance scheme that was subsequently successfully challenged by HMRC. Many celebrities and perhaps some politicians have been there before - time will tell as to whether he has to walk.

 

[Loxie]

What I find mind boggling, is that he claims that the error was "careless" not deliberate. Total reported sum is £4.8m, which includes a ca 30% penalty - so tax of approximately £3.7m was in dispute.

Would be a dream had enough dosh lying about that I could be "careless" with enough of it that just the tax on it is £3.7m... Taking the people for fools, and yet plenty out there who will believe it or just accept it.

He set up and part owns yougov. I believe the tax issue involved the distribution of his share holding to family members, especially his dad who lent him the money to start up. HMRC argued the shares he gave were taxable, his view, presumably backed up by his accountant, was they were not. He chose to settle rather than go to court so as not to distract the government at a tricky time. Of course this could all be nonsense too!

I do think he has made a complete mess of it and has compounded that by failing to resign.

 

[ozzyian]

On the other hand.... by HMRC definition 'careless' implies an innocence.

I think if HMRC have someone by the nuts but recognise that they are going to get into a costly, risky and protracted legal battle to uphold their judgement of 'deliberate' they will readily settle for a 'careless'. Pretty much like a plea bargain. If the PM can rustle up loans amongst his mates for appointments in a quid pro quo then I imagine and expect that the Chief Exec of HMRC could be persuaded to settle for a 'careless' with the benefits for all involved.

If Zahawi is innocent then I'm a Dutchman.

 

[salarchaser]

The bit that gets me is his claim that he didn't benefit from the offshore holdings.
If that was the case, why did HE have to pay the tax? Obviously a mis-truth.

I'm getting fed up with all the $h!t that's sticking. I'm not talking about Sunak without a seatbelt, but tax issues, a PM needing a £800k credit line (surely of you're that hard up you shouldn't be in a role where you may be exploited), bullying claims, and the list goes on.

Possibly the most tainted cabinet we've ever had. Mightn't say so much if they were competent, but they're not.
Arrogant, entitled and self important.

 

[mows]

The bit that gets me is his claim that he didn't benefit from the offshore holdings.
If that was the case, why did HE have to pay the tax? Obviously a mis-truth.

I'm getting fed up with all the $h!t that's sticking. I'm not talking about Sunak without a seatbelt, but tax issues, a PM needing a £800k credit line (surely of you're that hard up you shouldn't be in a role where you may be exploited), bullying claims, and the list goes on.

Possibly the most tainted cabinet we've ever had. Mightn't say so much if they were competent, but they're not.
Arrogant, entitled and self important.

Forget the loan.
Why would a stranger agree to guarantor on a £800k loan.
What did he charge Boris.
If not, surely that is a benifit in kind
And should the amount saved be taxable?

Its a very smelly swap just now.

 

[Handel]

The bit that gets me is his claim that he didn't benefit from the offshore holdings.
If that was the case, why did HE have to pay the tax? Obviously a mis-truth.

I'm getting fed up with all the $h!t that's sticking. I'm not talking about Sunak without a seatbelt, but tax issues, a PM needing a £800k credit line (surely of you're that hard up you shouldn't be in a role where you may be exploited), bullying claims, and the list goes on.

Possibly the most tainted cabinet we've ever had. Mightn't say so much if they were competent, but they're not.
Arrogant, entitled and self important.

I assume you mean the most tainted in modern times. Some of what went on a couple of hundred years ago makes this lot look like angels. Look up George Grenville as a case in point.

I think it is why May has been looking down her nose at the current lot. She was incompetent but honest.

 

[ibm59]

 

[Safranfoer]

Forget the loan.
Why would a stranger agree to guarantor on a £800k loan.
What did he charge Boris.
If not, surely that is a benifit in kind
And should the amount saved be taxable?

Its a very smelly swap just now.

I thought it was some distant relative that was guarantor? Or was he the person giving the loan?

salarchaser is right. Someone needing to borrow that much shouldn’t be in power.

 

[Elibank]

I thought it was some distant relative that was guarantor? Or was he the person giving the loan?

salarchaser is right. Someone needing to borrow that much shouldn’t be in power.

Relax, we’ve all done that….