The UK’s tax collectors, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), are under the microscope. Their heavy-handed recent clampdown on child benefit fraud has brought immense suffering to innocent families. As of November 30, almost 15,000 families had been verified as true claimants. The inquiry found that 1,019 cases, or roughly 4.3%, contained false claims. In recent months, serious concerns have been raised about HMRC’s investigation tactics. In particular, critics are concerned that they relied on flawed data provided by the Home Office.
The crackdown has raised questions about the impact on families who have been wrongly accused of fraud. Survey reports indicate that thousands of parents faced an unexpected end to their benefits. If so, it was because their models—and thus their travel plans—failed to capture the realities of their trips. In one notable case, a woman saw her benefits halted after she traveled to France to collect her husband’s remains. The Home Office should have had a record of her return to the UK, but instead HMRC was forced to take action on patchy information.
A Devon resident over in Dublin for the funeral of his sister. There were problems with that because his return journey wasn’t recorded by the Home Office. Perhaps no one is more frustrated than the families. They have had letters on overseas holidays going back at least three years, despite still living in the UK.
Many of the people caught up in these baseless investigations have turned out to be real deal claimants. Reports suggest that more than one-third of those investigated for suspected fraud were ultimately verified as still living in the UK. As many as 63% of people whose benefits were terminated stayed in the country. This further underscores the risk of miscalculation in the HMRC’s methodology.
Additionally, one parent who had been inaccurately logged as not traveling to Norway suddenly discovered their benefits suspended as well. One parent withdrew their support after he had to cancel a Thanksgiving. That painful choice was made only after one of their children suffered a serious epileptic seizure.
Despite a wave of udges and accusations, HMRC is undeterred. They argue that data from international travel records indicates a customer no longer qualifies for child benefit. An HMRC spokesperson explained, “We then conduct our own checks and open inquiries where necessary, giving customers at least one month to provide evidence before making any decisions on eligibility.”
Critics say that the process is not clear and not fair. One Guardian reader reported being informed by the Home Office that any travel history provided should be interpreted as an intention to travel rather than as definitive proof of travel. That’s a huge concern for families that, as we all know, may suddenly be trapped in a confusing bureaucratic maze with little direction or help.
Mariano delli Santi, an expert in data protection impact assessments (DPIA), criticized the process followed by HMRC and the Home Office. He noted, “It is obvious that the DPIA was conducted poorly … The purpose of a consultation within a DPIA is not to inform but to gather feedback and identify potential risks.” Such feedback is essential to help ensure that families have a fair shot at justice during this terribly traumatic process of investigation.
Investigations are ongoing—that means that there are thousands of open cases out there. As additional families provide documentation of their residency circumstances, the pool of legitimate claimants will continue to increase even more. The recent experience accentuates the need for precise data and interdepartmental information sharing between government branches to avoid harm and effectively protect public health and safety.