
HMRC Pays Rent to Hidden Offshore Company - kami102
http://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/hmrc-pays-rent-to-hidden-offshore-company/
======
stuaxo
HMRC is basically the IRS of the UK.

------
regularfry
Private Eye's been on about Mapeley for _years_.

~~~
cmdkeen
Indeed - their website
[http://www.mapeley.com/OurApproach/Customers/HMRC.aspx](http://www.mapeley.com/OurApproach/Customers/HMRC.aspx)

The key thing is HMRC sold their properties off and then paid rent to stay
there - rightly or wrongly that was the craze for a while.

The issue was they sold them to a company registered overseas. The criticism
is that the Government shouldn't have done that, or at least heavily penalised
that when considering bids because of the future loss of tax revenue. Worth
mentioning this isn't about currency evil Tory cuts, the buildings were sold
off in 2001 under the party now in opposition.

~~~
dogma1138
All government agencies did it they held billions in realestate so paying rent
made much more sense.

This is even quite common in business corporations sell their HQ to get a huge
influx of cash and lease it back this is a pretty standard accounting trick.

~~~
foldr
Echoing toyg, this can't possibly make sense for a government. In the long
run, they'll obviously pay more in rent than the buildings are worth.

~~~
dogma1138
of course it can owning those assets yields them nothing, selling and paying
rent is cheaper, if rent becomes too expensive they can move out.

~~~
foldr
If they're going to move out, they could keep the building and rent it out
themselves, and make more money in the long run that way.

------
Derpdiherp
So HMRC is dodging paying tax on it's offices - to itself? I'm confused as to
why they'd bother, couldn't they just take a bigger slice of the tax pie if
they needed it to cover the cost of the offices?

~~~
jamesbrownuhh
No, HMRC rents its offices from a commercial company - it just happens that
the company is headquartered offshore. HMRC themselves aren't dodging tax, and
I'm sure there is no suggestion that the offshore company is doing anything
improper either, the article is more about the irony of HMRC seeming to
endorse or validate such offshore behaviour when of course a big reason for
companies to go offshore is to - legally - avoid tax which would otherwise
have to be paid to authorities like HMRC.

~~~
madaxe_again
Although it's not really up to HMRC, they have to work through Private Finance
Initiatives (PFIs), which the Thatcher and Major governments ushered in. Some
people have become and will continue to become very wealthy from these deals.
You might think that some of those beneficiaries might have been in government
when PFI rules were introduced, and remain today - but you can't prove it, as
the money trail usually goes cold offshore.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Is there any hint of any evidence of that - it's an enormous accusation.
Stupidity and near bankruptcy of the state have always been the assumptions I
have worked with on why PFI was so popular. Actual corruption is a real step
too far though. Then again maybe the people pf Iceland thought the same

~~~
madaxe_again
No, that's rather the point of offshoring things, usually through lengthy
chains - although you only need three degrees to be immune to pretty much any
kind of disclosure. As for corruption, it's again hard to pin down, as even if
disclosed they're just private citizens managing legal investments.

