HMRC profits by new powers to crack down on illicit finance
The UK tax authority has significantly increased its use of
new powers to freeze and seize criminal funds in the banking system as part of
its campaign to crack down on illicit financing.
HM Revenue & Customs froze 166 bank and building society
accounts in the 2019/20 tax year to March 25, preventing individuals’ access to
or withdrawals from £19.5m suspected to have been derived from tax fraud and
other crimes.
In the previous 12 months, the first full tax year since
account freezing orders were introduced in early 2018, HMRC issued 60 orders
covering £8m. The data were obtained by law firm RPC in a freedom of
information request.
The orders make up only a small, but fast-growing,
proportion of the criminal funds HMRC recoups each year. In 2018/19 the
authority reclaimed some £192m using its full range of powers including civil
recovery measures under the 2002 Proceeds of Crime Act.
Lawyers said the increased use of account freezing orders
pointed to the ease with which they could be obtained and some high-profile
successes.
“The increased use of AFOs by HMRC is due to their
simplicity and how effective they’ve been at freezing money suspected to be the
proceeds of tax evasion or other illicit activity,” said Azizur Rahman, a
senior partner at law firm Rahman Ravelli.
Account freezing orders can be applied for in a
magistrates’ court by enforcement agencies including HMRC, the Serious Fraud
Office and National Crime Agency.
They were designed to aid the clampdown on money laundering
and illicit finance. The NCA estimates £100bn is laundered through the UK every
year.
If enforcement agencies can prove the funds were likely to
be used unlawfully they can then seize them using associated account forfeiture
orders, also issued by magistrates.
Between April 2019 and March this year HMRC seized some
£4.8m via account forfeiture orders after applying to the UK magistrates’
courts, up from £1.2m the previous year.
Lawyers said the gap between money frozen and seized by HMRC
was explained by the time it took to investigate potentially criminal funds and
the higher threshold needed to secure an account forfeiture order.
In some cases magistrates also concluded that the funds were
legitimate.
The powers were introduced at the same time as unexplained
wealth orders, which force politically exposed individuals or those suspected
to be linked to serious crime to explain the source of assets used to buy
expensive assets.
UWOs, often dubbed “McMafia laws” after the BBC crime drama,
have garnered publicity due to the high-profile nature of the individuals involved.
Targets include property owned by Zamira Hajiyeva, the wife of an Azeri banker
who spent £16m in Harrods over the course of a decade.
However, they are costly to obtain and require a High Court
order.
“Freezing orders are easy to obtain. The authorities only
need to show the magistrate that they have reasonable grounds to suspect that
money has been obtained by unlawful conduct,” said Adam Craggs, head of tax
disputes at RPC.
HMRC issued only one account freezing order in the few
months of the 2017/2018 tax year they were in operation, and forfeited no
assets. In a report last year, law firm Macfarlanes said agencies were
unfamiliar with the new rules and feared “making mistakes”.
Since then the NCA, SFO and HMRC have each garnered
high-profile successes with them. In February last year the NCA froze £520,000
in bank accounts in a money-laundering probe and seized £1.5m in cash.
Comments
Post a Comment