By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Hopefully they have done nothing wrong, and investigations will show this, but if proven to have cheated the system, then I have no sympathy for any sanctions put onto them.
Hopefully they have done nothing wrong, and investigations will show this, but if proven to have cheated the system, then I have no sympathy for any sanctions put onto them.
The taxpayer would be better served by a punitive fine (commensurate with income) and community service, if found guilty
A 'normal' person would expect to be sent down for that level of fraud if true. It's not exactly a small amount. Repayment with interest, a penalty and a prison sentence for them both.
Irrespective of current sentencing guidelines, if someone isn't a danger to the public and is found guilty of attempting to defraud the taxpayer, how does it make sense to then add a further burden onto the taxpayer? I fully understand the need to deter such offences, but surely that can be provisioned by swingeing fines - of an order that really hurts - plus community service
Irrespective of current sentencing guidelines, if someone isn't a danger to the public and is found guilty of attempting to defraud the taxpayer, how does it make sense to then add a further burden onto the taxpayer? I fully understand the need to deter such offences, but surely that can be provisioned by swingeing fines - of an order that really hurts - plus community service
Make the wealthier convict pay for their keep in prison.
Certain convicts are locked up and assets seized under the Proceeds of Crime gubbins.
Make the wealthier convict pay for their keep in prison.
Certain convicts are locked up and assets seized under the Proceeds of Crime gubbins.
Same should apply to "white collar" criminals.
I could agree with that - making the wealthier convict pay for their stay in prison
I simply don't see any sense in adding to the taxpayer's burden for this type of crime, which of course takes money out of the system for public services
Irrespective of current sentencing guidelines, if someone isn't a danger to the public and is found guilty of attempting to defraud the taxpayer, how does it make sense to then add a further burden onto the taxpayer? I fully understand the need to deter such offences, but surely that can be provisioned by swingeing fines - of an order that really hurts - plus community service
I very much doubt that each extra prisoner adds 65000 pound to the cost of running the prison service.
That's ok then, lets bang 'em up for fun, it'll bring the average cost down
your right more prisoners would bring the average cost down but that's not what I'm advocating. Im agreeing prisons should be for criminals not the likes of Murray who pose no threat to society at large and on that subject there will not be many tradies who haven't trousered a cashy or many who haven't offered the same for a VAT discount so apart from scale whats the difference?
No, let's bang them up when they deserve it according to the law of the land.
Bloody good idea
Let's scrap the Magna Carta, big mistake, laws of the land are immutable
But seriously, I do agree that sentencing should be applied equally for specific criminal offences; I just happen to think the sentencing could be better in this instance. Fook all i can do about it
your right more prisoners would bring the average cost down but that's not what I'm advocating. Im agreeing prisons should be for criminals not the likes of Murray who pose no threat to society at large and on that subject there will not be many tradies who haven't trousered a cashy or many who haven't offered the same for a VAT discount so apart from scale whats the difference?
#taxistheft.
[Post edited 24 Jan 2018 22:43]
No threat to society at large?
I can only imagine the scale and there's many individuals and companies that evade tax.
Consider the millions that are squirreled away. Think of how the home office cannot fund the police force or MI5 fully. Or the MOD cuts back on the type of vehicle deployed in war zones full of ground level IED s, or even the NHS struggling with staffing.
So no, the wealthy tax evader isn't going to mug you on the street or nut you in the pub. But he's still a fookin threat that needs sorting with an uncomfortable incarceration.
Let's scrap the Magna Carta, big mistake, laws of the land are immutable
But seriously, I do agree that sentencing should be applied equally for specific criminal offences; I just happen to think the sentencing could be better in this instance. Fook all i can do about it
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
