Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration
.png)
.png)
Confusion over CD inquiry costs
Jul 17, 2008, 09:37 AM
Authors :
Daniel
Show link :
Yes
Show link in individual comments :
No
Show Printer-friendly URLs list :
Yes
User can post comments :
No
Display comments :
No
Sticky at top of lists :
No
Promoted to front page :
No
Premium content :
No
Feature in listings page :
No
Post date :
Jul 17, 2008, 09:37 AM
Contrary to a claim by the Conservative party (one that was reported by the BBC as fact) the investigation into HMRC's much-discussed loss last year of confidential child benefit data did not cost £473,544.
The two main inquiries into the matter did, in fact, come at the price of £4,073,544, almost nine times the figure about which the Tories have taken great offence.
That amount, you see, was the cost of the Independent Police Complaints Commission's review of the misplaced CDs, as was revealed this week in a written parliamentary statement by Jane Kennedy.
Why make a big deal of it, I wondered.
'Why not?' barked David Hass, press officer to shadow chancellor George Osborne.
'It's our job as the Opposition to point out the cost of this Government's failures,' he added. 'OKAY?!'
(We must all hope that Cameron's blues don't assume it's their main job).
But less than half-a-million is hardly a large sum, I remarked.
On the contrary, sniffed Mr Hass, who went on to cite that great political cliche: the prohibitive cost to the taxpayer.
Well, £473,544 divided between the country's 31 million payers of income tax would amount to a one-off levy of one-and-a-half pence each. (The same total of cash would cover the annual additional costs allowance of 21 George Osbornes.)
I noted to Mr Hass that his employers hadn't kicked up a stink a month ago when the Poynter report was published at a final cost of £3.6 million (see page 95 of said document.) That's a whopping 11.6p from each of us working stiffs.
They did point out, he huffed, that the paper showed just how [insert the usual schoolboy insults] the Government is.
But, no, they didn't mention the money... sorry, the cost to the taxpayer.
And Mr Hass refused to acknowledge, let alone speculate upon, the savings that HMRC will inevitably make by taking Kieran Poynter's advice.
To return to the even-headed Taxation.co.uk, click here.
The two main inquiries into the matter did, in fact, come at the price of £4,073,544, almost nine times the figure about which the Tories have taken great offence.
That amount, you see, was the cost of the Independent Police Complaints Commission's review of the misplaced CDs, as was revealed this week in a written parliamentary statement by Jane Kennedy.
Why make a big deal of it, I wondered.
'Why not?' barked David Hass, press officer to shadow chancellor George Osborne.
'It's our job as the Opposition to point out the cost of this Government's failures,' he added. 'OKAY?!'
(We must all hope that Cameron's blues don't assume it's their main job).
But less than half-a-million is hardly a large sum, I remarked.
On the contrary, sniffed Mr Hass, who went on to cite that great political cliche: the prohibitive cost to the taxpayer.
Well, £473,544 divided between the country's 31 million payers of income tax would amount to a one-off levy of one-and-a-half pence each. (The same total of cash would cover the annual additional costs allowance of 21 George Osbornes.)
I noted to Mr Hass that his employers hadn't kicked up a stink a month ago when the Poynter report was published at a final cost of £3.6 million (see page 95 of said document.) That's a whopping 11.6p from each of us working stiffs.
They did point out, he huffed, that the paper showed just how [insert the usual schoolboy insults] the Government is.
But, no, they didn't mention the money... sorry, the cost to the taxpayer.
And Mr Hass refused to acknowledge, let alone speculate upon, the savings that HMRC will inevitably make by taking Kieran Poynter's advice.
To return to the even-headed Taxation.co.uk, click here.
Tags :
Tax Topic Tags :
- Blog
READERS'
FORUM 
New queries
NEWS 
CASES
Copyright © 2024 LexisNexis
Leave a comment