Councils given £9.5 million to crackdown on social housing fraud

The article states that the fraudsters cost the taxpayer£600m. That’s utter tosh. The taxpayers lost nothing. The rent was paid by the fraudsters - probably they are the most conscientious of payers!. But £600M represents the subsidy given to those social housing rentals compared to the market rent. Think what the total subsidy is and why it exists. The fact is that social housing is massively subsidised. Properties in London could command market rents 3-4 times the actual rent paid by the tenants. And the sole reason for them being given that subsidy is because at the time they first became a tenant they satisfied the criteria of the time. Do they satisfy the criteria now – Who knows as nobody checks!! Why are there 1.8M people on the housing waiting list (in England) – it is because the rents are ridiculously cheap compared to the market rents. Solution – Raise social housing rents to market levels. Those in need will qualify for housing benefit and have much if not all of their rent paid. Those with now good incomes will have to pay some or all of the higher rent, so the social housing operators will receive higher incomes. Those operators will then be able to go out and build more social housing. Win Win all around. And the waiting list for social housing is eradicated overnight. What any critics of this scheme should address is why there is a select group of people in social housing who deserve subsidised rents irrespective of their current circumstances (not those of years ago when the tenancy was first granted). Where I live 70% of property is owner occupied , 20% private rented and 10% social housing. What is the justification for those in social housing to pay lower rents than those in private rented accommodation. Think about what housing benefit is all about!

Margad. All tax on earnings is basically theft. It's just the same principle as when the Sheriff of Nottingham told the peasants what they must pay. He would tell them of the expenses he faced, and how they should appreciate the benefits he provided for them. Fast forward a few hundred years, and I suspect modern taxation takes much more than the 'good' Sheriff ever did. Breadwinners have a duty to their own families as well as their duty to the state and absolutely should avoid tax if they can. Tax avoidance is legaL Tax evasion is not. Tax evasion is fraud. Tax avoidance is not. Tax fraudsters should be pursued just like benefits fraudsters. In addition, your comment 'the perversion of self interest' is confusing. Self interest is normal, and not a perversion at all.

Margad should learn the difference betwen tax avoidance and tax fraud. Avoidance is making legitimate use of the tax laws in order to reduce a tax bill. (Tax) fraud is the same as any other fraud (benefit, housing, etc.) and is most common amongst those people who indulge in the latter by doing work for cash which is not declared in tax returns (if, in fact, they make them).