Fraud Advisory Services

The various forms of taxation are components making up a very complex area involving extensive legislation and case law. Its complexity makes it very much a specialist subject within both the legal and accountancy professions. Investigating tax fraud is an even more specialist subject within the field.

Such complexity and variation means that it is no wonder that problems continually arise with the interpretation of the relevant statutes or case precedents. The lay clients, the tax payers, often do not appreciate the wide ranging issues and interconnection between income tax, corporation tax, inheritance tax, VAT, capital gains tax, stamp duty, land duty, import duty and national insurance contributions. Add to that any international tax or offshore issues and it is easy to see how the complexity arises.

With the rise in wealth globally together with the interconnectivity of businesses and individuals wherever they live or work, there has been a corresponding growth in the quasi legal tax avoidance industry. Tax minimising schemes are continually being challenged by the tax authorities and new ones established in their place.

Not all challenges by the authorities are valid, and where evasion is being alleged in an otherwise legal scheme, expert assistance in tax fraud resolution is required. HMRC often make sweeping assumptions that assume great rafts of profit have been made. Forensic accountancy is needed to investigate the alleged fraud, unpick the assumptions and present a clear and accurate case for the defendant.

This forensic assistance is especially necessary in the arena of civil confiscation orders that are increasingly being sought by HMRC as a way to claw back tax that they believe ought to have been paid. The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 has given robust (some say draconian) powers to the authorities to make assumptions about anybody’s income, that it has not been legitimately earned and must be delivered up as either proceeds of crime or alternatively the tax element on it plus penalties and interest (which equate to the principal in any case). The onus is on the tax payer (or non-payer) to prove that his income is legitimate and mitigate his tax burden by demonstrating true levels of profit. This needs the expert and independent approach of a forensic accountant.

Confiscation, tax evasion/avoidance and money laundering are increasingly forming the bulk of work for those forensic accountants who specialise in fraud. It is just as well as the crimes, civil confiscations and indeed defence of inappropriate allegations of tax avoidance are all linked by similar Anti Money Laundering legislation and guidelines that the authorities are wheeling out regularly in their attempt to beat the big time fraudsters.

The trouble is that in practice often it is the case that the big career criminals have made adequate provision for their wealth and they protect themselves with their money. The authorities appear to be throwing the book at the smaller criminals and misguided or accidental transgressors while the organised criminals are smiling all the way to their offshore banks!

This state of affairs is worrying and one in which the forensic accountant can assist. So long as a client’s funds are not frozen or public funding for defendants is still available, the fraud specialists are able to mitigate the authorities’ approach in cases where they may be inappropriate or somewhat heavy handed. 

It is possible to challenge estimates of profit and business valuations carried out by HMRC as well as identifying the appropriate accounting treatment to adopt in relation to contentious areas of expenditure and provisions.

Support Publishing is a recognised term used for businesses that manage the publication of a range of items such as desk diaries, wall planners, pamphlets, magazines and books. The items will be used to promote a particular good cause. For example a diary might be prepared on behalf of a police sports foundation or a booklet might be published in support of child safety on crossings outside schools.

The intention is for the publication to be circulated to schools and community centres in such a way as to raise public awareness of the messages contained within, such as child safety, safety at work or the good work a charity might be doing.

Of course the publishing company needs to be paid for supplying the publication and there are two ways of doing this. The first is for the charity or good cause to approach the publisher and commission the required item. They may order and pay for several thousand desk diaries to circulate around potential donnors. Details of the charity and the work it is doing will be contained within the diary. This is no different from the marketing products that may be commissioned by commercial companies to raise awareness of their brands.

The second method for funding the publication is for the publisher to include commercial advertisements. An advertser may be happy to fund an entry in a good cause booklet knowing that the public will associate their name withe the good cause and in doing so raise the commercial awareness of their brand. In theory it would be a good method of marketing.

There is nothing futrther to mention concerning the first method of funding. However, the second method is wide open to abuse by con merchants who see this as an easy way to solicit money from the millions of gernerally small businesses around the country who find it very difficult to say “no” when asked to support a good cause locally while at the same time gaining valuable marketing exposure.

To illustrate the support publishing practice that has grown up in the UK over recent years consider the case of McPherson Stone Limited and Cavendish Green Limited. These support publishing companies have been well reported in the press following what was apparently the greatest number of complaints to Trading Standards offices around the UK ever received for one business. Because they were the same business, one simply setting up and taking over when the regulatory heat became too much for the other. Both companies have now been closed down by the authorities, there were foreunner companies and there are currently subsequent companies still operating!

The business produced quarterly magazines aimed at off duty police, ambulance and fire service personnel. The publication included a few articles of general interest, recipes and puzzles together with around 200 advertisements for local businesses. Each magazine was produced on a regional basis, with the same content but with paid advertisements from businesses in each region.

200 advertsiements through 50 regions, four times a year at an average cost of £250 per business gives a potential annual revenue of £10,000,000! When you consider that each advertiser received a copy of the magazine and a few hundred were distributed between a dozen or so police stations and ambulance centres – only about 50,000 magazines were printed each year.

Each magazine cost around £2 to print and post out. This leaves most of the £10 million to pay the dozen or so telesales staff around 40% commission and the rest, the lions share, going to the directors running the company.

The business worked because the sales team were self employed on commission, and used various means to hook the clients, whose names were simply extracted from phone directories and local papers. Most people dont like to say no when asked to support good causes, partcicularly if names of charitable causes are used as a hook. The first telephone call would spin the tale of widely distributed publications… “100,000s in your area” and solicit the interest. The second call, often only minutes after the first would be recorded and would exclude any detail of the false promises. It would simply confirm some details. The customer was often left somewhat bemused, thinking that they would make a final decision when they received their advertsiement copy for approval. However, what they would receive was an invoice with the only option for cancelling being the payment of a charge!

A large proportion of people will pay such an invoice not wishing to enter into any dispute. Those that knew their consumer rights a little better were more likley to bin the first payment demand or return it with a letter saying they did not wish to go ahead with the advertisement. But the support publisher has a plan for increasing the proportion of targets who pay from the initial 40% or so to around 60% or even 70% by a sequence of demanding letters and phone calls robust enought to shake the resolve of even the most resolute victim. In the illustration, the business even passed the unpaid bills over to another debt collecting business that it had set up itself to give the illusion of escalating seriousness in the matter. They even resorted to “door-stop” collection techniques and a video of the threatening behaviour of one particularly nasty instance was caught on the victim’s mobile phone and aired on BBC’s Watchdog in 2006!

That this is a fraud there is no doubt. However, it is a problem that is very hard to deal with. The methods used by the support publishers make it harder and harder to close them down, with sanctions being fairly lenient to date (director disqualification etc). It is likley that the Fraud Act 2006 could be a better route if it was possible to get the police economic crime units to take an interest. The trouble is they are very often unwittingly caught supporting these very cons by agreeing to take nominal quantities of the publications which they simply see as being “freebies”.

The telesales opperators in the business pay no tax. When investigating this particular support publisher I had a whistleblower contact me to say that all the staff used aliases and most were drawing supplementary benefit as well as earning £30 £50,000 per year!

So we have tax fraud, benefit fraud, Misrepresentation Act offences, Telecomunications Act offences, Data Protection Act offences and Fraud Act offences (plus the Company Act 1985 offences that I was investigating).

I tried to arrange a meeting with senior tax representitives from HMRC to inform them of the scale of the tax evasion, not only in the few companies that I investigated but concerning the industry as a whole, but the feedback was that theyconsidered the problem one that they could not deal with. The message was that theyw ould have to wait until legislation changed.

We eventually obtained a High Court Order to close the companies down. When the Official Receiver went in to the business the next day he found that the bank accounts had been stripped. Within a few days the business was back up running from the same (rented) premises.

Support publishing is a recognised problem within the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (formerly DTI/BERR) who continue to close these companies down only to have them reopen later under different names. Some open as partnerships or sole traders, having cottoned on to the fact that BIS will not investigate them then. The police are unlikley to have the time and therefore if they can make sure the complaints to Trading Standards are kept to a minimum by not pursuing debts too rigorously they will continue for the forseeable future to keep trading below the radar!

By Mark Jenner, forensic accountant and fraud investigation expert. You can keep up to date with his investigator’s diary blog.