February 19, 2009Second tax amnesty could hit offshore savers even harder

Plans for a second offshore ‘tax amnesty’ by HM Revenue & Customs could see tougher penalties for people hiding their savings offshore, a tax expert has said, amid frustration over delays to starting the scheme.

Speculation has mounted since HMRC confirmed in October last year it would be conducting a second tax amnesty, which it calls an ‘offshore disclosure facility’.

The amnesty offers taxpayers a reduced penalty for voluntary disclosure of bank accounts held in offshore jurisdictions.

The penalty for HMRC’s first amnesty in 2007 was capped at 10% of the outstanding tax owed plus interest. The amnesty netted the taxman an estimated £400m.

In its first tax amnesty HMRC relied on the five major UK high street banks and accountants to inform customers and clients about the scheme.

But one tax expert familiar with the situation said the second tax amnesty was likely to be much bigger, extending to include customers of about 30 foreign banks.

A spokesman for HMRC said the department is yet to finalise details of a second amnesty. He confirmed, however, that discussions are continuing with the British Bankers’ Association, the Building Societies Association and the Association of Foreign Banks in determining ‘how we can work together on offshore accounts.’

Story from: Accountancy Age

February 10, 2009Road accident victims 'bullied into settling' by insurers

Motor accident victims are facing high pressure tactics from insurers to settle for less compensation than they are entitled to receive, a leading accident lawyer said this evening.

But the Financial Services Authority was "turning a blind eye" to their plight, Amanda Stevens, President of the 4000-strong Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, said.

In one case, a woman was offered £1000 immediately after an accident if she would settle without using lawyers, Ms Stevens said.

"She declined and the offer was increased to £1700. She then instructed my firm. We valued the claim and achieved settlement that was more than 1000 per cent greater than the first offer, plus her legal costs."

Ms Stevens, addressing the association's annual dinner in London, said that accident victims were being let down by "weak financial regulation of certain insurance activities".

"It's not OK for the Financial Services Authority to turn a blind eye to high pressure tactics seeking to persuade people at their most vulnerable of the benefit of independent legal advice.

"These are not isolated anecdotes, but issues that trouble us day in, day out in our offices."

Similarly, victims of crime were being let down weak or non-existent regulation. She called on Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, to address the failings of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme.

"[Mr Straw] has spoken many times of his concern for victims of crime. While the purpose of the scheme is admirable, it is complicated and drawn out, with only one-third of crime victims actually aware that they can claim compensation."

The Public Accounts Committee had also recently noted that nearly one in five of victims found the application form too long and complex to complete; and only one in 20 of those eligible to apply do so in the first place, Ms Stevens said.

Other injured people were also suffering from bureaucracy or gaps in the compensation process, Ms Stevens added.

In the workplace, thousands of injured people could not trace their employers' insurers and so had no remedy for the harm they have been caused just by doing their jobs, she said.

The reason was the "lack of will to set up a comprehensive database of insurance policies, supported by a fund of last resort", where no policy could be traced.

"Such a database is only available for motor policies," she said. "This seems a glaring omission and one where APIL is working alongside others for change."

Bereaved people were also being let down, Ms Stevens added. There was a lack of legal aid funding for inquests, which was only granted in "exceptional" cases: in one case it took a battle of eight months to secure funding.

Finally medical accident victims were being failed by hospital trusts who were still reluctant to make early apologies to those they had injured, she added.

"Why, in the most poignant of circumstances, did my clients, who lost a child through culpable clinical error, have to wait almost 2.5 years, before an apology was finally offered and even then, only after persistent requests."

Ms Stevens said she was proud however to head an organisation which put people before the "pursuit of financial gain" which had led "so many in the city to the brink of collapse."

Story from: Times online

February 3, 2009Contact from HMRC

Some clients may be alarmed to receive a voicemail or text message purportedly from HMRC asking them to ring a certain telephone number. This is a genuine trial by HMRC to contact taxpayers in innovative ways, it is not one of those scams. The number given by the genuine HMRC message is 0191 225 5348. Do not respond to any other telephone numbers, unless it is given on a letter from HMRC.

Story from:
www.TaxAdviceNetwork.co.uk