HMRC Gun For Escorts
Donna Asutaits: HMRC target
Well I say escorts, I mean prostitutes.
The tax argument that has been made by prostitutes is simple enough: it runs along the lines of, I knew that what I was doing was illegal and I thought you didn’t have to pay tax on illegal stuff.
This defence was used successfully by Angela Nangle in 2008, see article here.
HMRC rarely go after escorts – despite the billions in tax it could produce – but this high profile court case with escort Donna Asutaits shows that they are sending out a fresh message: pay tax or else we are coming for you.
It’s totally clear from a legal point of view that this escort evaded tax while Mr Carr avoided tax, but it seems tough to me that this young woman, who sold her time in an extremely dangerous way to further her education, is going to be locked away (at the taxpayers’ expense) while all Jimmy had to do was say how sorry he was.
In many ways escorts could really bennifit from the Middle England Amnesty that HMRC is offering at the moment. If you are an escort and you want to get the best out of this amnesty do get in touch and I’ll try and help as best I can.
Here is the article from today’s Telegraph:
£1000 a night ‘high-class’ escort jailed over £120,000 tax fraud
A £1000-a-night prostitute, Donna Asutaits, has been jailed for tax evasion after she cheated the taxman out of tens of thousands of pounds.
The 29 year-old self-employed “high-class” escort, earned more than £300,000 in two years by selling herself to wealthy businessmen.
She went on to study for a master’s degree while she paid a £110,000 cash deposit on a £360,000 apartment in Knightsbridge, central London.
But after turning to prostitution when she was a poor student, she later failed to pay any tax on her earnings. When police raided her home, officers uncovered nearly £80,000 in cash along with valuable jewellery given to her by clients.
Southwark Crown Court heard Asutaits started working as a prostitute to fund a master’s degree at the University of Westminster.
The court heard that precise figures were difficult to establish “given the nature of the employment she was engaged in” after she claimed she had worked as an escort for a decade.
For full article click here.
There is also a good piece in the Daily Mail here.
