Reporting Tax Evasion

Twoflutes

Registered User
Messages
59
I have recently become aware of a person who deliberately lied on a tax submission to the Revenue. The purposes of this was to significantly reduce a Capital Gains Tax liability on the sale of a property.

Should I report this to the revenue or how interested would they actually be ?
 
I am sure the revenue get many reports from people that are bitter, bear grudges etc, as well as genuine reports. Not sure if they are able to follow up on all leads.
Has the person harmed you in any way?
 
I am sure the revenue get many reports from people that are bitter, bear grudges etc, as well as genuine reports. Not sure if they are able to follow up on all leads.
Has the person harmed you in any way?
No not done me any harm

I think I will probably leave it. None of my business and I am sure they are busy
 
@twousernames. These things usually have a way of resolving themselves in the end, usually at great expense to the evader. If you feel strongly about it, write or call Revenue. Be clear that you do not want your identity disclosed to anyone.
 
Be clear that you do not want your identity disclosed to anyone.
Before you rely on that, you might like to be certain that the other party cannot obtain information through an FOI / DAR request.

I know in the case of complaints of planning breaches for example, personal details such as name/address will be released.
 
Before you rely on that, you might like to be certain that the other party cannot obtain information through an FOI / DAR request.

I know in the case of complaints of planning breaches for example, personal details such as name/address will be released.

So the Revenue cannot guarantee annonymity in all cases ?
 
So the Revenue cannot guarantee annonymity in all cases ?
You really need to read the Revenue guidance. It explains what happens when you report potential tax evasion .
There is a form to complete and you are not obliged to give your personal information .
Revenue officers will be quickly able to decide if this is worth pursuing
 
You really need to read the Revenue guidance. It explains what happens when you report potential tax evasion .
There is a form to complete and you are not obliged to give your personal information .
Revenue officers will be quickly able to decide if this is worth pursuing
Ok, just asking !
 
I have recently become aware of a person who deliberately lied on a tax submission to the Revenue. The purposes of this was to significantly reduce a Capital Gains Tax liability on the sale of a property.

Should I report this to the revenue or how interested would they actually be ?

They'll be very interested, if there's any merit in what you send to them.

You can complete an online free text form anonymously, or just write to your local tax office anonymously. For obvious reasons they don't expect people to put their name to such reports, but they are obliged to consider each such report on its own merits, by reference to whatever other information they may have.
 
Do you know why this person evaded tax, what his/her personal motivation was? Was it just avarice? Are they financially insecure or bankrupt? Have they recently been a victim of crime and this is their personal justification of allegations the loss? Have they a huge medical bill.
Not that any of these are valid reasons for tax evasion, but avarice is by far the worst.

Is is anonymity important to you and why? A witness in a court case should be afforded no such protection (AFAIK).

If you feel strongly about this go for it, anonymous or otherwise. You’re strength will stand to you. And if you get audited yourself by Revenue in the coming years, you’ll know why!
 
Is is anonymity important to you and why? A witness in a court case should be afforded no such protection (AFAIK).

What court case? It sounds like you don't understand how the compliance side of the tax system operates.

In the context of CGT, all the OP needs to do is write in (anonymously) clearly identifying the person that they believe has understated their tax liability, and indicating why / how they believe this to be the case.

In respect of CGT there are not many moving parts, there's the proceeds (or market value) on disposal, the original cost (or market value) of the asset, costs on acquisition and disposal, and possibly indexation relief, enhance.ment expenditure and / or the use of losses carried forward.

The OP's acquaintance has most likely understated their taxable gain by understating or overstating one or more if the above. Revenue don't ultimately need to rely on the OP's evidence, other than that it will prompt them to look for the supporting figures & documentation in relation to the individual's return in the first place. Once they actually engage with the taxpayer, the return will either be proven correct or incorrect.
 
The OP's acquaintance has most likely understated their taxable gain by understating or overstating one or more if the above. Revenue don't ultimately need to rely on the OP's evidence, other than that it will prompt them to look for the supporting figures & documentation in relation to the individual's return in the first place.

As records only have to be kept 6 years it would be pretty hard to prove some costs if asked by revenue 20 years later.
 
As records only have to be kept 6 years it would be pretty hard to prove some costs if asked by revenue 20 years later.

This is an interesting area.

The onus as always is on a person to be able to prepare and file a correct return.

Section 886 TCA 1997 sets out the relevant legislation and it says in the first instance:

"Every person who... is chargeable to capital gains tax in respect of chargeable gains... shall keep, or cause to be kept on that person’s behalf, such records as will enable true returns to be made for the purposes of ... capital gains tax of such chargeable gains."

It then goes on to later specify a retention period as follows:

"Notwithstanding any other law, linking documents and records kept in accordance with subsections (2) and (3) shall be retained by the person required to keep the records—

(i) for a period of 6 years after the completion of the transactions, acts or operations to which they relate, or

(ii) in the case of a person who fails to comply with Chapter 3 of Part 41A requiring the preparation and delivery of a return on or before the specified return date for a year of assessment or an accounting period, as the case may be, until the expiry of a period of 6 years from the end of the year of assessment or accounting period, as the case may be, in which a return has been delivered showing the profits or gains or chargeable gains derived from those transactions, acts or operations..."

So, there's an obligation when you acquire a chargeable asset to have records. There's an obligation, as long as you have assets in respect of which you would be chargeable to tax on their disposal, to retain records such as will allow you to prepare a correct return. And there's an obligation, having disposed of an asset, to continue to hold records for a further period of 6 years, or indefinitely if you haven't filed a return. You can't get around the obligation to have records and linking documents, by simply holding the assets for long enough, and then plucking figures from thin air.

In the event that someone doesn't have records and is having to guesstimate material figures in respect of a CGT liability, they or their tax agent should be completing an Expression of Doubt to protect them from exposure to penalties.
 
What court case?

Any court case. I’m not referring to any court case with regard to this matter.
For example, a witness in a murder trial is not anonymous.

And, similarly to this post:
I know in the case of complaints of planning breaches for example, personal details such as name/address will be released.
... a complainant in planning matter is not anonymous.

It sounds like you don't understand how the compliance side of the tax system operates.
OK ;)
Sorry if it read that way.
 
Any court case. I’m not referring to any court case with regard to this matter.
For example, a witness in a murder trial is not anonymous.

It's totally off-topic / irrelevant to refer to though, unless you were doing so in the context of this thread.

Likewise in a planning matter, as I understand it, a complainant has to set out THEIR concerns, or how they will be adversely affected, by the proposed development. Totally incomparable to the subject of this thread.

A person tipping off Revenue to tax evasion isn't offering, or being asked, to be a witness.

A better analogy would be somebody anonymously phoning the police and saying you should send the squad car to look at X address, there's someone acting suspiciously, I think they're robbing the gaff..!
 
I am sure the revenue get many reports from people that are bitter, bear grudges etc, as well as genuine reports. Not sure if they are able to follow up on all leads.
Has the person harmed you in any way?
Yes, their actions has defrauded the public purse. Inform Revenue.
 
They would be interested. Report it.
Those that advise otherwise are usually those who aren't adverse to a little evasion themselves.
 
The rest of us pay more tax if those who evade their legal duty get away with it.
Report it definitely.
 
Back
Top