2023-10-10 16:20:46
Published on Oct 10, 2023 at 6:12 p.m.Updated Oct 10, 2023 at 6:20 p.m.
Fraud is an object of fantasy on both the right and the left of the political spectrum. Some denounce tax evasion, others denounce social benefit scams. All deplore the deleterious effect on consent to tax and on national cohesion. All point to the shortfall for the state coffers.
But no one knows the real scope of the phenomenon. “One question remains unanswered: does the tax administration manage to recover 10%, 20% or 50% of the amounts defrauded? » asked for a Senate information report on the subject last year.
To respond, the government launched the Fraud Assessment Council on Tuesday. Made up of around thirty members, it must meet every three months and provide, by the summer, an initial assessment of the sums involved. Thomas Cazenave, the Minister of Public Accounts, recognizes this: “We have need to see more clearly regarding the reality of fraud.”
Holes in the racket
This new Evaluation Council includes the directors of the main administrations concerned (DGFiP, Customs, Social Security funds, Pôle emploi, Urssaf, etc.), but not only that. Four parliamentarians – including a socialist senator and an LFI deputy – are also part of it, as well as two economists – Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuelle Taugourdeau – academics specializing in tax law and several experts such as the president of Transparency International or the former director of OECD tax policy, Pascal Saint-Amans.
“Work has been done, by the Court of Auditors in particular, on contribution fraud and social benefit fraud – approximately 8 billion on both sides. We have an assessment of VAT fraud, which we were able to discuss once more this morning with the DGFiP, around twenty billion,” explained Thomas Cazenave at the end of the first meeting. But this is far from covering the entire spectrum of fraud. There are holes in the racket. “On certain subjects, we have no figures. We must do this work of completeness,” pleaded the minister.
Random check
As for taxation, the working group agreed to move forward as a priority on income tax and corporate tax fraud. On the Customs side, a spotlight will be given to tobacco fraud. Finally, in the social field, the new Evaluation Council will focus in particular on Health Insurance fraud.
To have the most comprehensive overview possible, the administrations have agreed to have random control mechanisms in all their networks. “It has been made clear that this is the only statistically valid way to quantify fraud, tax by tax, and catch things that fly under the radar. This is a proposal that I made in my report on tax evasion and that several NGOs are supporting,” says LFI MP Charlotte Leduc.
“Fraud is by nature unobservable. When new mechanisms – such as the end of banking secrecy – shed light on part of the phenomenon, we must learn lessons,” adds Pascal Saint-Amans. The former slayer of tax havens judges very positively the in-depth work carried out by the French administrations and the new resources allocated to the control bodies. “A designer was missing. This can be the role of the Evaluation Council, he assures. This work should help to better allocate resources and calibrate anti-fraud policies. »
Around ten billion recovered
In the absence of a credible estimate of fraud, the government still has a figure at its disposal: that of the recoveries received by the tax administration at the end of its controls. These were around 11 billion euros in 2021. This is both a lot for the state budget, and little since it only represents half of the estimated VAT fraud alone…
The government does not intend to wait for the first conclusions of the new Evaluation Council to act. In the finance bill for 2024, he included around ten measures to strengthen the fight once morest fraud. Experimental measures are extended or made permanent, such as the collection of data on social networks or the online survey under a pseudonym. Loopholes in the legal system exploited by VAT fraudsters are closed. Companies’ obligations, for example in terms of documenting their transfer pricing policies, are strengthened and sanctions toughened.
The government is currently refusing to set a quantified objective for its anti-fraud plan. “It’s very difficult if we don’t have a more complete and clearer vision of the reality of the phenomenon,” explains Thomas Cazenave. Hence the challenge, at the same time as we strengthen the legal arsenal and the means, of having this evaluative work. »
1696976779
#government #quantify #extent #tax #social #customs #fraud
