Enter Your E-mail

The news that a former employee of a Swiss bank has handed over to Wikileaks, documents relating to the affairs of around 2,000 of the bank's account holders, has made the national press.

One might expect that the focus would be the possible publication of private individuals' highly confidential information on the Internet but this is not the case; in fact the 'whistleblower' has - so far at least - remained right-lipped about the identities of the account holders. Most articles concentrate instead on allegations that the documents prove that some of the account holders, who apparently include several politicians, have evaded tax.

To people familiar with the jargon, this is a very serious charge, because it implies criminality: tax avoidance is legal, albeit possibly morally questionable whereas tax evasion is illegal. To quote former Chancellor Denis Healey, "the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion is the thickness of a prison wall."

So if the news is accurate, then the leaked documents may prove to be more than a little embarrassing.

HM Revenue & Customs will be pleased that tax evaders are being cast as the villains - it is not all that long ago when audiences of any age would instinctively presume the Tax inspector / Collector to be the bogeyman, and sympathise with the poor taxpayer. HM Revenue & Customs has of course been working very hard to change perceptions. And it is not alone. UK Uncut and The Tax Justice Network are organisations which are raising public awareness (or changing public perceptions) of how some big businesses pay tax ...or don't. When it comes to deciding what is 'fair' when making sure that everyone pays their fair share, these parties are clearly siding with HM Revenue & Customs, rather than the taxpayers under scrutiny.

Of course very many ordinary taxpaying citizens are currently contending with difficult financial circumstances and HM Revenue & Customs is, as always, under pressure to raise public revenue. But the question of what amount of tax it is 'fair' to pay in a particular set of circumstances arguably has a subjective quality: to whom should a taxpayer company be fair - its shareholders who want the company to pay as little tax as possible so they can receive greater dividends, or the broader taxpaying community who may be able to pay less tax, if that large company pays more? Thankfully, statute has the answer - at least in theory.

Apart from improved public relations, HM Revenue & Customs may have more reason to be cheerful: if UK taxpayers find themselves amongst the 2,000 account holders on the list and have not previously declared the funds, they may now be encouraged, if appropriate, to avail themselves of the Liechtenstein Disclosure Facility, (LDF), which is an extremely favourable alternative. Those who have spotted that Switzerland is not in Liechtenstein should read the small print of the LDF. And marvel at HMRC's generosity to those who can afford it.