[Closed] Is it 'Morally wrong' to pay cash in hand?

legal form of payment innit.

Just because you pay cash, it doesn't mean they don't have declare it.

Just because you pay cash, it doesn't mean they don't have declare it.

Exactly.

Some people expect me to give them a discount just for paying in cash. They don't seem to understand that I will
Still put it through the books and pay VAT and Tax on it (because I like to do things right) so why would I discount for cash.

neal, hypothetically speaking, how would making cash payments to a tradesman illegal affect you?

I offered a customer 68p off for paying by cash , as thats what i get chrged by sadwest for paying in a cheque.

What I do think is morally wrong is the fact that politicians seem to want us to focus on the tradesmen / working class and conveniently forget that most millionaires and billionaires pay virtually no tax at all.

Still put it through the books and pay VAT and Tax on it (because I like to do things right) so why would I discount for cash.

Well, if you get a cheque you have to take the time to go to the bank and pay it in, and if you have a business account there might be a charge. Also, with cash, there is no question of potential future hassles with cheques bouncing, taking time to clear etc - I'd say all that might be worth a small discount?

And footflaps +1 - as if people paying their plumber cash-in-hand and some of them possibly not declaring it all costs the country anywhere near as much as people like Lord Ashcroft or Philip Green.

And footflaps +1 - as if people paying their plumber cash-in-hand and some of them possibly not declaring it all costs the country anywhere near as much as people like Lord Ashcroft or Philip Green [b]or The Guardian Media group or Ken Livingstone or Tony Blair[/b]

FIFY 😉

I feel quite strongly about this!

as Footflaps says this should be used to divert attention away frommthe real issue which is v rich people using smart ar$e accountants and lawyers to reduce their tax rate to something artificially low.

The bouncing cheques issue is another supporting factor.

On the other hand the conversation does often follow these lines ....

"that will be £1,000 plus VAT"

"what if i pay cash?"

"well OK, that will be £1,000 all in"

Not much getting paid to Gideon that way is there? But the issue is quantum and this pales into insignificance compared to the NonDoms, the Bransons, the Vodaphones etc etc that dress it all up in nice legalities but have the morals of the sewer.

And footflaps +1 - as if people paying their plumber cash-in-hand and some of them possibly not declaring it all costs the country anywhere near as much as people like Lord Ashcroft or Philip Green or The Guardian Media group or Ken Livingstone or Tony Blair

Very clever - except the point here is that it's a member of the current government (who could actually do something about it) moralising about tax avoidance/evasion, when some of the biggest contributors to his party are some of the worst offenders. If your point is 'it's not just Tories that avoid/evade tax' then yes, well done - have a cookie.

Capitalism is morally wrong.

Having spent 26.5 years in tax, including 8 years in investigations "Cash is still legal tender". However HMRC can pick out the idiots who don't think about GPR checks, plus the (based on reasonable experience) good chance of being dobbed in by a bitter ex's, or people who are sick of hearing you say how much money you have, but don't pay tax on, in the pub.....

I'd say all that might be worth a small discount?

Oh go on then, I'll knock the price of a pint off. There is only one reason people expect a discount for cash, and it's not because they're reducing the hassle in your day. My standard answer to "How much for cash?": "Oh, you were thinking of paying by cheque were you?" 😛

except the point here is that it's a member of the current government (who could actually do something about it) moralising about tax avoidance/evasion

unlike Ed who was a member of the last government who does no moralising on tax evasion at all and didn't do anything about it at all

as for tax evasion I think the proposed limit on tax relief for charity donations was actually a step forward, it stopped the rich deciding on what they wanted to fund and stuffing the rest of the tax payers with the boring stuff such as hospitals, roads, education etc

If your point is 'it's not just Tories that avoid/evade tax' then yes, well done - have a cookie.

[i]have a cookie.

thanks[/i]

Hope you declare it 😉

I pretty much pay cash where they don't take a card, as cheques are really not trusted unless you are 'known'.

Is it morally wrong to pay cash? Of course not.

Is it morally wrong to pay cash and not obtain a headed receipt from whoever did the work to help them avoid paying their dies and to save you a few quid? Yes, I'd say so.

AS two wrongs don't make a right it's pointless (not to mention petty and childish) trying to argue 'Well so-and-so doesn't pay all [b]their[/b] taxes'.

Why would people avoid tax? the existence of a 'Laffer curve' is a fantasy made up by right wing loons.

Hope that helps 😉

loum - Member

[i]have a cookie.

thanks[/i]

Hope you declare it

I didn't have to work for it 😉

If all the cash jobs were added up across all the industries where it is common then surely it is a big enough pot to be condemned as morally wrong ? Example if 10,000 people avoid paying £100,000 in tax, but 1,000,000 people avoid paying £1,000 in tax which is worse than the other ??

Zulu-Eleven - Member

the existence of a 'Laffer curve' is a fantasy made up by right wing loons.

Hope that helps

Well I checked, and apparently this is a rare case of you actually being right :

[i]"The term "Laffer curve" was reportedly coined by Jude Wanniski after a 1974 afternoon meeting between Laffer, Wanniski, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and his deputy press secretary Grace-Marie Arnett"[/i]

So thanks for the tip - it did indeed help.

as already said above.... i never used to offer any discount on cash payments. my bill would be the same for a cheque or cash. the only difference being is that i wouldn't declare the cash as it saved me a fortune in tax.

I didn't have to work for it

Like CMD's £250k "donation" dinners for favours?

Why would people avoid tax? the existence of a 'Laffer curve' is a fantasy made up by right wing loons.

Ibrahimovic will be paid more than €1m (£778,000) a month to play for PSG, whose new Qatari owners have made clear that the salary will be raised high enough to soften the consequences of a proposed 75% top rate of tax, due to be imposed by Hollande in the autumn on those earning above €1m a year.
"This is a demonstration that the higher rate of tax won't prevent big players from coming to play in France."

neal, hypothetically speaking, how would making cash payments to a tradesman illegal affect you?

As long as people my customers are happy to pay by Cheque/Online Transfer/Paypal then it won't affect me at all.
(and 90% of them do already as that's my preferred way of doing it anyway)

Well, if you get a cheque you have to take the time to go to the bank and pay it in, and if you have a business account there might be a charge. Also, with cash, there is no question of potential future hassles with cheques bouncing, taking time to clear etc - I'd say all that might be worth a small discount?

Bank charges are an issue, (albeit a small one) but I don't mind it too much as its worked into my prices anyway.

Going to the bank on a Saturday morning to do the banking is one of my weekend pleasures, as there is a cracking bacon sandwich place next door for breakfast.

Plus, if I got paid exclusively in cash I would still have to bank it as I need to pay suppliers and other stuff via the bank anyway.

(never had a customers cheque bounce in 17 years, so won't be too worried about that one.)

I encourage all my clients to pay via online bank transfer - cheques and cash are nothing but a PITA. It also gives me a record of who's paid what, when. These days, there's no reason to mess around with cash. I do occasionally take a £40 portrait booking fee in cash, but clients always get a receipt - again, this means I have a record.

And I've had two bounced cheques in just seven years of trading - both were late payments for wedding photography - neither saw their photos until the cash was in my account...

I don't generally deal with the general joe public, all my clients are businesses themselves so they are hungry for receipts and so am I. There are occasions when suppliers will offer me 'discounts' for off-the-books cash, but without the paper work my tax / vat liability is increased so theres no benefit in it for me.

I have to say - I reckon its online where a lot of the dodgy dealing is happening. When I buy materials and kit from ebay traders or the ebay channel of businesses - stuff is pretty much never arrives with any kind of receipt or vat paperwork.

I recently bought a bunch of fire extinguishers through a company's ebay account, I was on a long road trip so used ebay to find a vendor that was on my route. Made the transaction through ebay but collected and paid in person at their Trade Counter. Arrived to collect and even through the payment was made by card, at the counter with chip and pin - they didn't want to issue a vat receipt because it was 'the ebay price'.

Going back to the original article the guy gave an answer to the straight question.

Mr Gauke was asked specifically about the practice of offering to pay tradesmen cash in hand in the hope of avoiding paying VAT on a bill in interviews with journalists for the Daily Telegraph, Guardian and Daily Mail.

The Daily Telegraph quotes Mr Gauke as saying: "Getting a discount with your plumber by paying cash in hand is something that is a big cost to the Revenue and means others have to pay more in tax.

"I think it is morally wrong. It is illegal for the plumber but it is pretty implicit in those circumstances that there is a reason why there is a discount for cash. That is a large part of the hidden economy."

Speaking the the BBC's Newsnight, Mr Gauke said there was nothing wrong with paying in cash, but doing so to actively avoid tax was wrong.

I would challenge any minister to condone tax evasion.

i say sod the tax , they get enough !!!

Its far easier to chase plumbers or painters than go after large companies who have strong and well paid legal teams to defend themselves. Yes everyone should pay tax but have HSBC or Barclays been called "morally wrong" yet? Apologies if they have. And no I probably don't declare all my jobs but then I occasionaly like to eat food that doesn't come off the reduced counter.

Paying by cash certainly isn't immoral in itself however doing so with a nod and a wink to avoid paying VAT or declaring income is.

IMO of course 🙂

Don't do discount for cash but add a premium for anything else. Thats exxcatly what I do even in small sales. PP costs you more.
I also believe that we should do all we can to slow down the advance of everything going electric. The day will come when we can't hide anything from the state when we should hide all we can. It's my money not yours.
In this day and age we should be taking money from those who don't deserve it. Note I say deserve not earn. Branson deserves it more than the lazy sod up the roadwho I KNOW is signing on and goes to Florida every year.

This one is so easy to answer I owe my sons life to tax payer funded care so personally I do believe tax evasion is wrong .
I also resent the attitude of those who come into my home to quote for work and openly suggest that I join in their tax fraud . One double glazing sales man apologised for part of his quote explaining that because part of the work needed a safety certificate then that would mean that VAT was payable on that element, ie the whole quote had been provided on the assumption that it would be off book.

on line banking is now very common, for all age groups. yes quite a few ask how much off for cash.. to which my reply is always .. nothing.. everything goes through the books it makes life simple and i sleep nights.

Paying cash in hand, in itself, isn't morally wrong.

Paying cash in hand in order to gain benefit as a result of others not paying tax is morally wrong.

Accepting cash in hand is not, in itself, morally wrong

Accepting cash in hand with the intention of not declaring it, is morally wrong.

The existence of larger examples of tax evasion does not make smaller examples morally superior, it merely differentiats between the scale of the problem. It's like saying shops lifting is ok simple because large scale theft is occurring at the same time.

Politicians using smaller scale problems to divert attention from larger scale ones is not morally wrong, but it is objectionable and sadly predictable.

Politicians using smaller scale problems to divert attention from larger scale ones is not morally wrong, but it is objectionable and sadly predictable.

Read the other articles - he was asked about Paying Cash in hand to avoid VAT. Paper lead the question to make the headline

But on the other side of the coin we have politicians decide to change their residences and fiddle their expenses.... Perhaps if they showed more of an example?

Is illegally underdeclaring your own earnings to avoid tax morally wrong? If so, then surely knowingly assisting someone else to do the same - in return for a financial benefit to yourself - is also morally wrong?

There really doesn't seem to be a lot to discuss here. The guy was asked a straight question, and gave a straight answer. As far as I can tell, he didn't bring it up, nor did he suggest plans for any new measures to clamp down on it.

So David Gauke has said something that sounds entirely reasonable in response to a question about paying cash in hand, whilst talking actively about clamping down on tax evasion for the super rich...

Why have the media taken this angle on it?

This sort of cr@p really annoys me. Its why politicians are so evasive on TV, they can't answer anything without it being dragged across the media out of context.

WTF?

Mike, I am aware of what he said vs the headlines and hence the distinction that I am drawing. There is a separate issue of deliberate media distortion to address the perceived need to feed the insatiable (sic) hunger for 24 news as the "Cav can leave Sky" headlines also showed.

The only place I regularly use cash is the pub.

Is it morally wrong to have a pint or two of decent ale without checking the establishment's tax returns?

This paying cash story is a non-issue.

Now is it wrong to evade or avoid tax or even to assist others in doing so? Legally only for one of them, but morally? Well now we decent question, but wording it that way might cause members of this government (and the last) some embarrassment. To say nothing of a whole load of highly intelligent accountants and lawyers.

How about the tradesman who works a 40 hour week, all monies through the books. Clear and above board.

Said tradesman decides to do some small cash-in-hand jobs at the weekend. Is it morally wrong not to declare this? I'd argue not.

What I would say needs changing is our current tax system so that there are not the loopholes etc for people to exploit.

Here's a theory for the Tories to take on. Seeing as they're so keen on Trickle-down economics, which we're being told exists in something other than Tory Think-tank literature

How about Trickle-down tax morality.

We'll all promise to pay the appropriate amount of tax on every transaction when:

1. All members of the front bench declare their tax affairs - in the interests of seeing that those in glass houses....
2. Tory Peer Lord Ashcroft pays the estimated £130 million he avoided in tax by exploiting his non-dom status
3. Tory MP Zac Golsmith pays the estimated £8 million he avoided in tax by exploiting his non-dom status
4. They pay more than lip-service to collecting the correct level of tax from Vodaphone, Barclays, Goldman Sachs, HSBC and all the rest of their friends in the city

Until then they can * right off with their monumentally hypocritical moral posturing!!! We hear them saying they are 'aggressively targeting' tax avoidance? Oh... really? I'll believe it when I see the remotest evidence of that actually happening!!

*s!!!