Thousands are being targeted by harsh HMRC tax-collecting scheme linked to 10 suicides
Four years ago, Michael Squires received a letter that turned his life upside down.
A brown envelope containing a tax demand for £24,000 landed on his doormat.
It came out of nowhere and gave Mr Squires sleepless nights as he worried about where he would find the money.
“It’s a horrible anxious feeling, I knew that I had taken due diligence and I knew that I had done what I thought was right,” he said.
“So, you feel the system is against you, you feel like you can’t fight back. In a way, you know that you’ve been conned, and you feel stupid… and I felt that for quite some time.”
Mr Squires, a healthcare worker from Leicestershire, is not alone.
‘Unjust campaign is targeting wrong people’
Tens of thousands of people across the country are facing crippling tax demands from HMRC in a harsh campaign that has been linked to 10 suicides.
HMRC has been ruthlessly pursuing people with the “loan charge” which came into force in 2017 through a piece of legislation that targeted those who were paid their salaries through loan schemes. It made individuals liable for tax that their employers should have paid.
Tax lawyers described it as an unjust campaign that is targeting the wrong people and undermining the rule of law by overriding statutory taxpayer rights.
HMRC has been targeting workers who had their salaries paid into umbrella companies, which would pay individuals a loan that was typically not paid back. Many of those who signed up, including nurses, supply teachers and council workers, had little or no choice but to take on work through these schemes.
They were directed to the schemes by their work agencies, reassured that their tax and national insurance was being taken care of and that the schemes were HMRC compliant.
In many cases, they were mis-sold.
Tens of thousands in fear of bankruptcy
For years HMRC failed to act against these schemes, which resulted in widespread underpayment of income tax and national insurance. The courts have since ruled that the employers or agencies should have been paying tax to the exchequer. However, the loan charge legislation allowed HMRC to pursue individuals in lieu of the agencies or employers.
Five years ago HMRC started sending letters to individuals, explaining that these schemes were “disguised remuneration schemes”, imposing a tax liability on what it now classified as income and applying interest – then urging them to settle.
In some cases, the bills ran into the hundreds of thousands of pounds. Those who could or would not pay were warned that they would be hit with a loan charge, typically a much larger amount because the total sum was taxed in a single year, often applying a 45% tax rate on the income. It meant that in many cases people were paying back far more than they would have done if they weren’t part of the schemes.
HMRC threatened to take people’s possessions and sell them at auction if they didn’t find the money.
In some cases, the agency set up payment plans, but in others, people had little choice but to take out further loans.
Tens of thousands of people are still living in fear of bankruptcy, and they could be forced to hand over cash if and when they sell their homes.
The consequences have been devastating.
Warning of further suicides
Sky News has spoken to families whose lives have been torn apart. One woman told us that her marriage was breaking down, while others described dangerous mental health spirals.
HMRC has admitted that there have been 10 suicides linked to the loan charge.
It has referred cases of suicide to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), which oversees certain serious complaints about the conduct of tax inspectors.
Campaigners have repeatedly warned of the risk of further suicides and have demanded that HMRC provide a 24-hour suicide prevention helpline.
Mr Squires said: “We are being pursued by a very big organisation who hasn’t warned us. I received a warning letter four years later that I may have been employed by a company involved in a scheme that wasn’t legitimate.
“So, we’ve had no warning. HMRC is not out of pocket. The umbrella companies aren’t out of pocket.
“The agencies that pushed it aren’t out of pocket. It’s only the end worker and we’re just normal people.”
Michael Squires says he felt like the system was against him
HMRC targeting individuals rather than scheme organisers
While some of those who engaged in loan schemes entered into them with the explicit intent to minimise their tax bills, a large number were simply trying to do the right thing.
In many cases individuals were advised by their work agencies to sign up to the umbrella companies to streamline their tax affairs, helping them to avoid the complicated process of setting up a limited company.
Others turned to the umbrella companies because they were worried about falling foul of new IR35 rules that apply to contractors operating as limited companies.
The NHS, local authorities and other public sector organisations all engaged workers who were part of these schemes.
Back in 2021 HMRC even admitted that it had at least 15 contractors on its own books who were part of “disguised remuneration schemes” between 2016 and 2020.
Read more from Sky News:
Asylum seekers moved from taxpayer-funded hotels – to other hotels
Warning about huge number of Facebook Marketplace scams
Toddler found starved to death – prompting questions for police
Keith Gordon, a tax barrister, said: “When the contractors were paid, the PAYE rules applied and were meant to ensure the tax was deducted from the salary before it was received by the workers.
“That PAYE was not paid. The workers suffered a deduction but that was just simply taken as fees by the promoters of the schemes which were running rather dubious tax avoidance of agents without contractors’ knowledge.”
He suggested that HMRC were targeting individuals instead of the organisers of the schemes because it was an easier way of recouping the money.
Mr Gordon continued: “Number one: The promoters have deeper pockets and might be able to fight back against unfair legislation.
“Number two: That would probably amount to admitting the revenue made a mistake in the first place.
“Number three: Some of these promoters are now insolvent because they’ve had plenty of years to wind up their affairs and become out of the reach of the tax authorities.”
Keith Gordon said HMRC is targeting individuals because it is easier
Loan charge has ‘no legal basis’
MPs and tax lawyers are calling for HMRC to rescind the policy – arguing that it amounts to a retrospective charge that overrides taxpayers’ statutory protections by effectively dismissing time limits on HMRC’s right to investigate tax affairs and by blocking individuals’ rights to fight their case in court.
It is also without any legal precedent.
The courts have repeatedly rejected HMRC’s interpretation that income tax can be applied on loans to individuals.
A 2017 Supreme Court ruling put the onus on the employer to deduct income tax before loans were advanced to an individual.
A 2019 parliamentary report concluded that “the loan charge is in defiance of the rulings of the court… no court case has given the legal basis for the loan charge”.
MPs are preparing to debate the loan charge in parliament today, where they will hear that tens of thousands of people were the victims of widespread mis-selling.
They will question why HMRC is not putting more energy into targeting the promoters and companies responsible for these schemes.
These companies made their money by charging individuals a fee to run the loan schemes. It meant that in many cases people had similar deductions to what they would have had if they were under PAYE.
David Davis, Conservative MP for Haltemprice and Howden, said: “The loan charge has been, frankly, a government-sponsored disaster for a very large number of people, ordinary decent people, nurses and other ordinary people who were faced with a work contract that denied them any employment rights, told them they had to accept and that was the basis on which they got the job.”
He added that HMRC should “go back to the promoters, go back to the contractors who insisted on these terms and say, ‘you can pay at least your share, if not the whole bill’, but they’re not doing that. And I’m afraid in my view, they’ve made a massive ethical error in not doing so”.
An HMRC spokesperson said: “The loan charge seeks to recover tax that has been avoided by disguising income as loans. It is our responsibility to collect the tax that people owe.
“We take the wellbeing of all taxpayers very seriously and recognise that dealing with large tax liabilities can lead to pressure on individuals.
“The support we have in place to help people settle their previous tax avoidance includes offering payment by instalments: these arrangements are based on what the taxpayer can afford, and there’s no upper limit over how long we can spread payments.
“Our message to anyone who is worried about paying what they owe is: please contact us as soon as possible to talk about options.
“Above all we want to prevent people getting into these types of situations and our message is clear – if a tax scheme sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”
More than six million new cancer cases could be diagnosed in England between now and 2040, according to leading charities.
This would equate to a diagnosis every two minutes, which is up from one every four minutes in the 1970s.
A coalition of more than 60 cancer charities, known as One Cancer Voice, is warning the government must take urgent steps to tackle cancer care in England – including faster diagnosis targets and better prevention policies.
The analysis carried out by the charities is based largely on pre-pandemic data and suggests cases will increase by 14.2% over the next 15 years, with diagnoses of some of the most common cancers reaching all-time highs.
This includes over a million new prostate cancer diagnoses, and more than 900,000 for breast cancer by 2040.
The research also finds regional variations:
• South East – over a million diagnoses
• North East – 865,000
• East of England and the South West – 722,000
• London – 714,000
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Man loses voice box after late cancer diagnosis
Six key demands
These figures starkly set out the need for change, and the timing of their release is significant.
Later this autumn, the government is expected to publish its long-awaited National Cancer Plan.
These leading charities have combined forces to put pressure on ministers ahead of its publication, demanding six measures which they say must be implemented if cancer outcomes are to improve:
• A pledge to meet all cancer waiting times by the end of parliament in 2029
• A new earlier diagnosis target, with improved screening programmes
• The introduction of strong cancer prevention policies
• Addressing inequalities in patient care
• Improving access to clinical trials for cancer patients
• Better support for people to live well with and beyond cancer
‘A defining moment’
The pandemic had a huge impact on cancer care in the country, and an ageing population adds further pressures.
But the most recently available data, which is around a decade old, suggests the NHS is still lagging behind many comparable countries.
The chief executive of Cancer Research UK, Michelle Mitchell, described the national plan as a “defining moment”.
“If the UK government delivers an ambitious fully funded strategy, we could save more lives and transform cancer outcomes, propelling England from world lagging to among world leading when it comes to tackling this disease,” she said.
Read more:
Are we are entering ‘golden age’ of cancer treatment?
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “This government is prioritising cancer care as we turn around more than a decade of neglect of our NHS.
“We’re already making an impact, with 95,000 more people having cancer diagnosed or ruled out within 28 days between July 2024 and May 2025, compared to the same period the previous year.
“This will soon be supported by our new National Cancer Plan, setting out how cancer care will improve over the coming years.
“We’re also making it easier for people to get tests, checks, and scans with DIY screening kits for cervical cancer, new radiotherapy machines in every region, and by creating the first smoke-free generation.”
Nigel Farage has said he would take the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) if Reform win the next election.
The party’s leader also reaffirmed his pledge to repeal the Human Rights Act and disapply three other international treaties acting as “roadblocks” to deporting anyone entering the UK illegally.
In a speech about tackling illegal migration, he said a Reform government would detain and deport any migrants arriving illegally, including women and children, and they would “never, ever be allowed to stay”.
Sky News looks at what the ECHR is, how the UK could leave, and what could happen to human rights protections if it does.
What is the ECHR?
On 4 November 1950, the 12 member states of the newly formed Council of Europe (different to the EU) signed the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – otherwise known as the ECHR.
It came into force on 3 September 1953 and has since been signed by an additional 34 Council of Europe members who have joined, bringing the total to 46 signatories.
The treaty was drafted in the aftermath of the Second World War and the Holocaust to protect people from the most serious human rights violations. It was also in response to the growth of Stalinism in central and Eastern Europe to protect members from communist subversion.
The treaty was the first time fundamental human rights were guaranteed in law.
Sir Winston Churchill helped establish the Council of Europe and was a driving force behind the ECHR, which came from the Charter of Human Rights that he championed and was drafted by British lawyers.
Sir Winston Churchill was a driving force behind the ECHR
To be a signatory of the ECHR, a state has to be a member of the Council of Europe – and they must “respect pluralist democracy, the rule of law and human rights”.
There are 18 sections, including the most well-known: Article 1 (the right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (right to private and family life) and Article 10 (right to freedom of expression).
The ECHR has been used to halt the deportation of migrants in 13 out of 29 UK cases since 1980.
ECHR protections are enforced in the UK through the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates most ECHR rights into domestic law. This means individuals can bring cases to UK courts to argue their ECHR rights have been violated, instead of having to take their case to the European Court of Human Rights.
Article 8 is the main section that has been used to stop illegal migrant deportations, but Article 3 has also been successfully used.
Read more:
Why Farage’s small boats plan is not actually about policy
Legal expert explains if Farage deportation plan would work
The ECHR is interpreted by judges at this court in Strasbourg, France. File pic: AP
How is it actually used?
The ECHR is interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) – you’ll have to bear with us on the confusingly similar acronyms.
The convention is interpreted under the “living instrument doctrine”, meaning it must be considered in the light of present-day conditions.
The number of full-time judges corresponds to the number of ECHR signatories, so there are currently 46 – each nominated by their state for a non-renewable nine-year term. But they are prohibited from having any institutional ties with the state they come from.
An individual, group of individuals, or one or more of the signatory states can lodge an application alleging one of the signatory states has breached their human rights. Anyone who have exhausted their human rights case in UK courts can apply to the ECtHR to have their case heard in Strasbourg.
All ECtHR hearings must be heard in public, unless there are exceptional circumstances to be heard in private, which happens most of the time following written pleadings.
The court may award damages, typically no more than £1,000 plus legal costs, but it lacks enforcement powers, so some states have ignored verdicts and continued practices judged to be human rights violations.
Read more: Asylum seekers in charts and numbers
Inside the European Court of Human Rights. File pic: AP
How could the UK leave?
A country can leave the convention by formally denouncing it, but it would likely have to also leave the Council of Europe as the two are dependent on each other.
At the international level, a state must formally notify the Council of Europe of its intention to withdraw with six months’ notice, when the UK would still have to implement any ECtHR rulings and abide by ECHR laws.
The UK government would have to seek parliament’s approval before notifying the ECtHR, and would have to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 – which would also require parliamentary approval.
Would the UK leaving breach any other agreements?
Leaving the ECHR would breach the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, a deal between the British and Irish governments on how Northern Ireland should be governed, which could threaten the peace settlement.
It would also put the UK’s relationship with the EU under pressure as the Brexit deal commits both to the ECHR.
The EU has said if the UK leaves the ECHR it would terminate part of the agreement, halting the extradition of criminal suspects from the EU to face trial in the UK.
Keir Starmer has previously ruled out taking Britain out of the ECHR
How would the UK’s human rights protections change?
Certain rights under the ECHR are also recognised in British common law, but the ECHR has a more extensive protection of human rights.
For example, it was the ECHR that offered redress to victims of the Hillsborough disaster and the victims of “black cab rapist” John Worboys after state investigations failed.
Before cases were taken to the ECtHR and the Human Rights Act came into force, the common law did not prevent teachers from hitting children or protect gay people from being banned from serving in the armed forces.
Repealing the ECHR would also mean people in the UK would no longer be able to take their case to the ECtHR if the UK courts do not remedy a violation of their rights.
The UK’s human rights record would then not be subject to the same scrutiny as it is under the ECHR, where states review each other’s actions.
Two victims of John Worboys sued the Met Police for failing to effectively investigate his crimes using Article 3 of the ECHR. Pic: PA
How human rights in the UK would be impacted depends partly on what would replace the Human Rights Act.
Mr Farage has said he would introduce a British Bill of Rights, which would apply only to UK citizens and lawful British citizens.
He has said it would not mention “human rights” but would include “the freedom to do everything, unless there’s a law that says you can’t” – which is how common law works.
Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg said this would simply confirm the rights to which people are already entitled, but would also remove rights enjoyed by people visiting the UK.
The mother of a baby whose stomach and bowel “moved into her chest” has hailed new research aimed at treating her daughter’s rare condition.
Amelia Turner was given life-saving surgery at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) when she was a few days old.
She suffered from severe congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) – a potentially fatal condition affecting one in every 3,000 babies.
The condition means the diaphragm – the muscle between the abdomen and the chest – has not fully developed.
As a result, organs that are supposed to sit within the abdomen could move into the chest space and crush fragile growing lungs. It means babies don’t have enough space to grow fully formed lungs.
Current treatment for severe CDH involves surgery while the baby is in the womb, with surgeons delicately placing a surgical balloon into the baby’s windpipe to stimulate the lungs to grow. This only increases survival odds to 50%.
Amelia was born with severe congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Pic: Georgia Turner/PA
‘A complete whirlwind’
Amelia’s mother, Georgia Turner, 26, from London, said finding out she had the condition made her pregnancy “a complete whirlwind”.
“The team hoped Amelia’s condition would only be moderate,” she said. “Unfortunately, after Amelia was born, the clinical team told me how serious her condition was as her bowel and stomach had moved into her chest.”
Amelia spent four months recovering on the neonatal unit at GOSH, then another three months at her local hospital, before she could go home for the first time.
The “cheeky” 17-month-old needed a second surgery after her CDH reoccurred when she was 15 months old.
It’s hoped new research will not only make treatment less invasive and significantly increase survival rates but also lower the chances of relapses.
Read more from Sky News:
TikTok puts hundreds of UK jobs at risk
‘Headphone dodgers’ targeted by new TfL campaign
Georgia Turner with her daughter Amelia. Pic: Georgia Turner/PA
Science-fiction made real
A system developed by experts at GOSH and University College London in the UK, and KU Leuven in Belgium, would see treatment delivered straight to a baby while still in their mother’s womb.
It would see nanodiamonds used to transfer a hormone, known as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which stimulates lung growth.
It was tested on lab-grown mini-lungs, using 3D printing to simulate compression, as well as rats with the condition.
One of the experts, Dr Stavros Loukogeorgakis, a GOSH surgeon, said: “Nanodiamonds, 3D-printing and growth hormones in the womb all sounds a bit science-fiction. But this research is really showing us what is possible.”
He said the treatment could be available to families in as little as five years.
Ms Turner said: “New research like this is great to see how experts are trying to make the treatment for CDH more successful for all children, and less invasive.
“Hopefully better treatments will also prevent relapse cases like Amelia.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024