The attitude of some AAM contributors to tax evasion

Of course there are varying degrees of offence, guilt and punishment in relation to tax offences as with any other category of crime. A significant minority of tax settlements arise from genuine error on the part of the individuals involved, and misunderstandings on their part as to how particular aspects of the tax system work.

One hypothetical example would be of a self-employed individual who prepares their own tax return without professional assistance and in so doing claims an illegal tax deduction for civil service rates of mileage & subsistence.

Any person in this situation will usually be treated by the Revenue as no different to a guy who is found to be consciously & systematically evading tax by underdeclaring part of his earnings.

However, at least in my own moral compass, there is a hell of a difference between these two scenarios.
 
Betsy Og said:
The bad conclusion is that everyone who engages in any level of tax evasion is equally guilty, and if that should be held true then isnt the logical conclusion that all should be punished equally?
Click to expand...
No - that conclusion is not logical to me.
I would contend that the guilt is not equal, and that perhaps this is borne out in the fact that all punishments are not equal, i.e. it is matter of fact that there are varying degrees of offence, guilt and punishment in relation to tax offences.
Click to expand...
Guilt is a binary (true or false) issue. The seriousness of the offence and the matching of the penalty to that offence is another matter. Obviously punishments are not equal - in most cases interest and penalties are calculated on the evaded liability. Thus the larger the evasion the larger the penalty. As opposed to there being fixed penalties. Seems logical to me.
 
Guilt is a binary (true or false) issue
Click to expand...
Very succinct ClubMan. I was about to launch into a few paragraphs to say as much.
My point about the little guys being as guilty as the big ones was made in the context of how, in my experience, it is the same little guys "just making a little extra for themselves" that ride the highest of moral high horses when it comes to damming corrupt politicians and developers etc. The plumber who does a nixer or teacher who does a grind are guilty of the same crime as the fat cat who evades millions of Euro in taxes. The only difference is scale and this is a result of opportunity, not a greater or lesser regard for the law.
 
ubiquitous said:
Typically this carry-on is most common on domestic repair/maintenance tasks or home improvement works where the consumer does not have any obligation to keep records or accounts of personal expenditure.
Click to expand...
Just for the record, my first exposure to 'discount for cash' was through a solicitor many years ago. When I balked at paying £100 for sending one letter, he suggested £60 if I paid in cash.

The most recent example of 'discount for cash' was again related to the legal eagles - a barrister couple were getting a €100k job done on the D4 pile, and offered the builder to pay half in cash.
 
Moderator note: various posts straying off topic and into a discussion about democracy etc. have been moved to this thread.

-- ClubMan
 

The best one I have heard so far in my many years in accountancy:

We were getting some work done in our offices. Builder gives quote to tax partner. They have discussion in open plan office re the quote. Partner asks "is that your best price?" Builder replies "ehhh well if you want to pay cash I can take off the vat"..met by face by partner..so builder adds "..but ehhh you probably want an invoice, don't ya?"

...I nearly choked trying to hold in the laughter!...only because it was worthy of a Monty Pyton sketch.


But on a more serious note..i believe the black market economy exists in the Irish psyche...I would estimate that 90% of the people I know would happily pay cash if it saved them 21% of the final bill. In fact a lot of people view a "trade" ie plumber, electrician etc as a guaranteed source of untaxed income...nudge nudge wink wink.

Now IMO it doesn't make it right but at the same time I can understand peoples frustrations when news headlines are reporting x number of millionaires who paid no tax in xxxx year.

What these reports don't disclose is that these millionaires are availing of legitimate tax breaks but at the same time are liable for PRSI of 5% on their income ...but of course that wouldn't be sensationalism now would it?

In my book, honesty is the best policy. Better to pay tax now than get hit down the line for tax & penalties...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register