Talk Morgan Forums Community Vehicle Talk (non-Morgan) Tax evader's collection confiscated

Here are some of the assets confiscated: 286 vehicles including supercars and classic cars and 160 motorcycles.
They were in the garage of the family Grossi.

Video of the confiscated collection.
Corriere della Sera

In just seven years the family group (father now deceased) declared an income of 14 million instead of an actual income of 50 million. I imagine the period of evasion was actually much longer.

The group Grossi, in fact, owned 136 properties(with buildings), 140 land holdings, three sailboats, five speedboats , as well as the 286 vehicles, including classic cars and supercars, and 160 motorcycles (in the video footage of the Corriere della Sera). A patrimony of 70 million euro that was recently seized by the court.

Good.

I've always paid my tax, and I resent that I have to pay more than I should because we have to cover the share of all the rich and greedy tax dodgers out there.

I quite agree Giles, my understanding of the European Tax system is that they have juristriction over the previous 5 years and can go back a further 2 only if sufficient evidence of a misdemeanour is revealed.
So Peter is probably right in his estimation in that they have enjoyed the unreal position for some considerable while.

This is how the French National Automobile Museum in Mulhouse was started--the Schlumpf brothers, wealthy industrialists in the late '70's, failed to pay their taxes and their secret collection was confiscated by the French government and turned into a museum. Their loss is our gain--for those who haven't visited this museum, it is well worth the trip. It has the finest collection of Bugattis in the world, as well as many other notable cars.

Allen
'69 4/4

What a collection and good to see a Morgan included.

We in the UK tend to way to soft on tax evasion in my opinion.

The problem is that all too often rich people step over the line from tax minimization, which is perfectly legal, and into tax avoidance, which is theft. Many Rich people seem to think that they shouldn't pay tax. Well I'm sorry.

It is time that tax avoidance is treated as theft, not a "procedural misdemeanor' which is often the result with the guilty party allowed to buy their way out by paying the back tax plus a penalty.

What really irritates me is the way big multinational companies get away with it.

Peter, I was always under the impression that tax avoidance isn't a procedural misdemeanour, it is legal and as you mention, perfectly illustrated by the multitude of large companies (and wealthy individuals) who use tax havens, etc, to their advantage. It is tax evasion that is illegal?

Whatever the case, I agree that a lot more should be done to ensure hyper weathy individuals and large commercial organisations pay their share, rather than using dodgy loopholes to avoid it. (Starbucks, Google, Amazon, etc being good examples)

Simon,

My accountant tells me that there are plenty of cases where HMRC, on finding what they believe to be tax avoidance, make the suspect an "offer": pay the unpaid tax plus a penalty of 2 to 4 times the unpaid tax and we will not prosecute.

Prosecution of tax avoidance cases is difficult, it is one area where our system of jury trials works against justice as to present a complex tax avoidance case to a jury of lay people in a manner that is going to get a conviction is very difficult. A number of very costly trials have failed because the Jury was unable to grasp the incredibly complex nature of the case.....

HMRC inspectors now have to show that the cost of preparing the court case will be less than the amount of unpaid tax likely to be recovered. Which may be why they make people "an offer they can't refuse"!

At a guess, I assume actions, such as those taken by Gary Barlows and Jimmy Carr, fall into the avoidance category but are so obviously geared the evade payment of the correct amount of tax that they end up in the situation you mention above?

I think there is also a "public interest" issue as well.

If the suspect is unknown then the media will not be interested and no publicity follows.

Targeting those in the media is possibly done even if there is a risk of failure as the media attention gives the HMRC free publicity.

It is a very complex area: my accountant is paid to make sure that we pay all the tax we should as i never, ever want HMRC on my case.

Mind you they don't help themselves: A couple of years ago I had three bills stating I owed "No pounds and no pence" and a final demand threatening prosecution if I didn't pay. I wanted to send a cheque for the sum, but my accountant said no, ignore it. It seems that it was a computer issue and only when a person reviews the case is it then cancelled.