Tag Archives: HMRC-performance

NAO issues scathing attack on HMRC customer service

By   25 June 2024
0

The National Audit Office (NAO) has issued a report: Value for money which covers HMRC’s and Specifically, the department’s support of its “customers” (although I maintain the word should be; Taxpayers) through services provided online, through written correspondence and over the telephone.

(My) Summary

HMRC is awful and services are getting worse.

Some extract quotes:

“In 2022-23, HMRC spent £881 million on customer service. Performance has been below expected levels for telephone and correspondence for almost all of the last five years”.

“HMRC’s telephone and correspondence services have been falling below the expected service levels for too long, and HMRC has not achieved planned efficiencies. To achieve value for money HMRC must provide a timely and effective service for customers needing help with their tax or benefits, even as it attempts to reduce costs”.

“HMRC’s strategy to replace traditional forms of contact with digital services makes sense in many ways. Digital transactions can be easier and faster for many customers to access and submit information. However, they do not currently allow customers to resolve more complex queries”.

“… digital services have not had the effect HMRC hoped for…”  “While many of HMRC’s digital services work well, they have not made enough of a difference to customer contact levels” and  “they do not currently allow customers to resolve more complex queries”.

“HMRC has been unable to cope with telephone demand and consequently fallen short in processing correspondence and dealing with telephone calls according to procedures, creating further service pressures. HMRC felt it had no choice but to close phone lines to catch up and compel people to use digital services. It has had to reverse this approach in the face of stakeholder opposition”.

“There are opportunities to reduce unnecessary levels of contact and improve efficiency. HMRC must demonstrate it understands how to make these gains, and form more realistic plans for how to deliver these, while ensuring it maintains service levels.”

This performance is simply unacceptable – as anyone who has had dealings with HMRC will know.

New report finds HMRC performance the worst ever

By   28 February 2024
0

A report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has found that HMRC’s services continue to deteriorate and are now at an “all time low”.

In summary, Anne Olney MP who sits on the committee said of the new report:

  • PAC expressed disappointment over the five-year decline of service levels
  • Taxpayers are “exasperated”
  • In 2022/2023 the number of callers waiting ten minutes or more for HMRC to answer has increased from 46.3% in 21/22 to 62.7%
  • HMRC stated that it “did not have the resources to meet rising demand for its phone and post services at expected standards”
  • HMRC agrees that it will not now require digital interaction until a service is of a suitable standard
  • Criminal prosecutions fell from 691 in 2019/20 to 240 in 2022/23 which “sends the wrong message” (my comment: although this could partly be due to backlogs in the criminal justice system)
  • The report results were “quite predictable” and were a “letdown for taxpayers”
  • It is “distressing” to find people who “want to get it right, and who have no intention whatsoever of defrauding the Exchequer, but just find it really, really difficult to access the right support”.
  • In failing to access the right support, taxpayers are liable. It is not on HMRC – even if the services are difficult to access, it is still the responsibility of the taxpayer to pay the right amount of tax
  • There is “probably” a need for more investment and recruitment
  • A smarter allocation of the resources HMRC has could see a better return for taxpayers
  • Finally: “It really is important that HMRC get this right.”

In terms of VAT, we can confirm from personal experience that HMRC’s performance is at an unacceptably inferior level; from telephone responses, to written replies and a generally poor “attitude”. This is supported anecdotally by clients and colleagues’ experiences.