Thursday, October 09, 2003
The Tax Man Cometh
The following hilarious piece appeared in The Guardian, Saturday 27 September 2003:
Dear Mr Addison
I am writing to you to express our thanks for your more-than-prompt
reply to our latest communication, and also to answer some of the points
you raise. I will address them, as ever, in order.
Firstly, I must take issue with your description of our last as a
"begging letter". It might perhaps more properly be referred to as a
"tax demand". This is how we, at the Inland Revenue, have always, for
reasons of accuracy, traditionally referred to such documents.
Secondly, your frustration at our adding to the "endless stream of
crapulent whining and panhandling vomited daily through the letterbox
onto the doormat" has been noted. However, whilst I have naturally not
seen the other letters to which you refer, I would cautiously suggest
that their being from "pauper councils, Lombardy pirate banking houses
and pissant gas-mongerers" might indicate that your decision to "file
them next to the toilet in case of emergencies" is at best a little
ill-advised.
In common with my own organisation, it is unlikely that the senders of
these letters do see you as a "lackwit bumpkin", or come that, a
"sodding charity". More likely they see you as a citizen of Great
Britain, with a responsibility to contribute to the upkeep of the nation
as a whole.
Which brings me to my next point. Whilst there may be some spirit of
truth in your assertion that the taxes you pay "go to shore up the
canker-blighted, toppling folly that is the Public Services", a moment's
rudimentary calculation ought to disabuse you of the notion that the
government in any way expects you to "stump up for the whole damned
party" yourself. The estimates you provide for the Chancellor's
disbursement of the funds levied by taxation, whilst colourful, are, in
fairness, a little off the mark. Less than you seem to imagine is spent
on "junkets for Bunterish lickspittles" and "dancing whores", whilst far
more than you have accounted for is allocated to, for example, "that
box-ticking facade of a university system".
A couple of technical points arising from direct queries:
1. The reason we don't simply write "Muggins" on the envelope has to do
with the vagaries of the postal system;
2. You can rest assured that "sucking the very marrows of those with
nothing else to give" has never been considered as a practice because
even if the Personal Allowance didn't render it irrelevant, the sheer
medical logistics involved would make it financially unviable.
I trust this has helped. In the meantime, whilst I would not in any way
wish to influence your decision one way or the other, I ought to point
out that even if you did choose to "give the whole foul jamboree up and
go and live in India", you would still owe us the money. Please forward
it by Friday.
Yours sincerely,
H J Lee, Customer Relations
The following hilarious piece appeared in The Guardian, Saturday 27 September 2003:
Dear Mr Addison
I am writing to you to express our thanks for your more-than-prompt
reply to our latest communication, and also to answer some of the points
you raise. I will address them, as ever, in order.
Firstly, I must take issue with your description of our last as a
"begging letter". It might perhaps more properly be referred to as a
"tax demand". This is how we, at the Inland Revenue, have always, for
reasons of accuracy, traditionally referred to such documents.
Secondly, your frustration at our adding to the "endless stream of
crapulent whining and panhandling vomited daily through the letterbox
onto the doormat" has been noted. However, whilst I have naturally not
seen the other letters to which you refer, I would cautiously suggest
that their being from "pauper councils, Lombardy pirate banking houses
and pissant gas-mongerers" might indicate that your decision to "file
them next to the toilet in case of emergencies" is at best a little
ill-advised.
In common with my own organisation, it is unlikely that the senders of
these letters do see you as a "lackwit bumpkin", or come that, a
"sodding charity". More likely they see you as a citizen of Great
Britain, with a responsibility to contribute to the upkeep of the nation
as a whole.
Which brings me to my next point. Whilst there may be some spirit of
truth in your assertion that the taxes you pay "go to shore up the
canker-blighted, toppling folly that is the Public Services", a moment's
rudimentary calculation ought to disabuse you of the notion that the
government in any way expects you to "stump up for the whole damned
party" yourself. The estimates you provide for the Chancellor's
disbursement of the funds levied by taxation, whilst colourful, are, in
fairness, a little off the mark. Less than you seem to imagine is spent
on "junkets for Bunterish lickspittles" and "dancing whores", whilst far
more than you have accounted for is allocated to, for example, "that
box-ticking facade of a university system".
A couple of technical points arising from direct queries:
1. The reason we don't simply write "Muggins" on the envelope has to do
with the vagaries of the postal system;
2. You can rest assured that "sucking the very marrows of those with
nothing else to give" has never been considered as a practice because
even if the Personal Allowance didn't render it irrelevant, the sheer
medical logistics involved would make it financially unviable.
I trust this has helped. In the meantime, whilst I would not in any way
wish to influence your decision one way or the other, I ought to point
out that even if you did choose to "give the whole foul jamboree up and
go and live in India", you would still owe us the money. Please forward
it by Friday.
Yours sincerely,
H J Lee, Customer Relations
