
HMRC admits £47 million loss in breach of taxpayer accounts
Taxpayers who are being affected will suffer 'no financial loss', according to John-Paul Marks, the chief executive of HMRC, the UK's tax authority.
Mr Marks told the Committee: 'It's about 0.2% of the PAYE population, around 100,000 people, who we have written to, are writing to, to notify them that we detected activity on their PAYE account.'
Asked if this applied to individual working people's PAYE accounts, not companies, he replied: 'That's right, individuals. To be clear, no financial loss to those individuals.
Mr Marks added: 'This was organised crime phishing for identity data outwith of HMRC systems, so stuff that banks and others will also unfortunately experience, and then trying to use that data to create PAYE accounts to pay themselves a repayment and/or access an existing account.'
An investigation into the matter, which took place last year 'including jurisdictions outside the UK', led to 'some arrests last year,' Mr Marks told MPs.
Angela MacDonald, HMRC's deputy chief executive and second permanent secretary, added: 'At the moment, they've managed to extract repayments to the tune of £47 million.
'Now that is a lot of money, and it's very unacceptable.
'We have overall, in the last tax year, we actually protected £1.9 billion worth of money which sought to be taken from us by attacks.'
Get your tax return done early and find out sooner if you're owed money. ⏲️
We'll let you know if you've overpaid tax after you file your Self-Assessment tax return and refund you. 💷
File today. 👇 https://t.co/OIh3mAczQk pic.twitter.com/vbmz1AjfKK
Ms MacDonald stressed the breach was 'not a cyber attack, we have not been hacked, we have not had data extracted from us'.
She later added: 'The ability for somebody to breach your systems and to extract data, to hold you to ransomware and all of those things, that is a cyber attack. That is not what has happened here.'
HMRC said it had locked down affected accounts and deleted log-in details to prevent future unauthorised access.
Any incorrect information has been removed from tax records and officials have checked to ensure no other details have been changed.
People affected will receive a letter from HMRC over the next three weeks.
Elsewhere, Mr Marks told MPs that HMRC phone lines were down on Wednesday afternoon, but said this was 'coincidental'.
They will be 'back up and available in the morning', he added.
Recommended reading:
An HMRC spokesperson said: 'We've acted to protect customers after identifying attempts to access a very small minority of tax accounts, and we're working with other law enforcement agencies both in the UK and overseas to bring those responsible to justice.
'This was not a cyber-attack – it involved criminals using personal information from phishing activity or data obtained elsewhere to try to claim money from HMRC.
'We're writing to those customers affected to reassure them we've secured their accounts and that they haven't lost any money.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
German controversy surrounds jail term for transgender far-right extremist
A controversy has broken out in Germany about whether a trans right-wing extremist should serve a prison sentence in a women's or a men's July 2023, Marla-Svenja Liebich was sentenced by the Halle District Court in Saxon-Anhalt to a total of one year and six months in prison without parole for extreme right incitement to hatred, defamation, and insult. Liebich appealed against her sentence and the time she was known as Sven Liebich. German media reports say Liebich used to be a member of a neo-Nazi group called Blood and Honour. At the end of 2024, Liebich had her gender entry in official records changed from male to female. She also changed her first name. The basis for this was Germany's Self-Determination Act, which had just come into force and strengthened the rights of transgender people. The Act allows people to change their gender marker and first name through a simple declaration at a registry office, instead of a judicial media have questioned whether Liebich's change was serious."Whether the change is serious is doubtful," wrote Der Spiegel. "Liebich has been known for years for her right-wing extremist views and has also made queerphobic statements in the past."Liebich has taken legal action against media outlets for what she considers to be false representations of her gender identity.A complaint against Spiegel to the Press Council was unanimously rejected by the Council as unfounded. Spiegel said the letter said it was likely that Liebich "made the change of civil status in an abusive manner in order to provoke and embarrass the state".Liebich will shortly begin her prison Chief Public Prosecutor in Halle, Dennis Cernota told German public broadcaster MDR in Saxony-Anhalt that Liebich would serve her prison sentence at the Chemnitz women's confirmed this in a post on X. "I will begin my prison sentence as scheduled," she said. "On August 29, 2025, at 10pm, I will arrive at the Chemnitz correctional facility with my suitcases."A decision on where to place Liebich will then be made at the start of incarceration. The chief public prosecutor said the prison administration would decide whether Liebich could pose a threat to security and order, which could lead to her transfer to another German media report that Liebich has recently lost another case, against journalist Julian Reichelt at Berlin Regional editor-in-chief of Nius, posted on X in July: "Anyone who follows the reporting on neo-Nazi Sven Liebich can only come to one conclusion: The traffic-light coalition government has managed, by law, to force almost the entire German media landscape to tell untruths and make grotesquely false claims. Sven Liebich is not a woman."Die Welt said the court's Second Civil Chamber decided to reject Liebich's application for a preliminary injunction, saying it was unfounded.


South Wales Guardian
3 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Further delay in Roxy Media winding up case
Roxy Media, the media production and management firm run by the TV presenter and her husband Dan Baldwin, is facing winding-up proceedings from His Majesty's Revenue & Customs (HMRC). A hearing at the Insolvency and Companies Court in April heard that the firm owed £377,000 in tax, which had been reduced from an unknown amount. Lawyers for Roxy Media said last month that the company was seeking to take the case to a tax tribunal. The company applied for a further adjournment on Wednesday to await the outcome of that appeal. Jon-Selous Borlace, for HMRC, told the specialist court: 'The company said it filed an appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal.' ICC Judge Sally Barber allowed the adjournment 'to await the outcome of the appeal', setting the next hearing for November 12. Willoughby set up the company with her husband to specialise in managing media clients. Records on Companies House indicate that she was appointed as a director of the company in 2014, and Mr Baldwin in 2008. The presenter is best known for previously fronting ITV daytime show This Morning and Dancing On Ice.


South Wales Guardian
3 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Fact check: Wage claim confuses mean and median incomes from different years
The claim does not have any sources attached to it, but it seems likely the post is comparing very different figures. The person posting appears to have cited a figure for mean income – not median – from 2004/05 instead of 2008, with a median household income figure – not mean wage – from 2019 rather than 2025. Where does the claim of a £24,769 median wage in 2008 come from? The poster claimed that the median wage was £24,769 in 2008, without giving a source. It is not clear where this figure was obtained from. It is possible that the user took this figure from a Wikipedia article which somewhat misleadingly cites a report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). The Wikipedia article correctly lists the £24,769 figure as the mean, rather than the median which the social media poster claimed. But the Wikipedia article also says that the figure is '2008 data'. This is correct insofar as the IFS report was released in 2008. However, the Wikipedia article does not make it clear that the figure is actually from the 2004/05 fiscal year, not from 2008. The mean is the average number in a data set, whereas the median is the middle value when the set is in numerical order. The figures used by the IFS were taken from the 2004/05 survey of personal incomes (SPI) from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). In its report the IFS updated the figures to present them in the equivalent 2007/08 does the claim of a £29,600 mean wage in 2025 come from? The poster also claimed without a source that the median wage is £29,600 in 2025. Again it is not clear where this figure has been found. The number matches the Office for National Statistics median household income figure for 2019, making that one potential source for the claim. However, median household income is not the same as median wage. A Google search found that the number also matches an unsourced figure on a jobs website which claims that the 'average salary in the UK (2025)' is £29,600. However, apart from updating the year, this page has not been changed since 2020 when it also listed the 'average salary in the UK (2020)' as the same – £29,600. Owing to the timing it is possible that this website has taken its 'average salary' figure from 2019's household income. The oldest archived version of the page is from April 9 2020, while the ONS's median household income figure was released just a month earlier on March 5. What would the £24,769 income be worth in 2004/05? The IFS's report does not appear to reveal its exact method for calculating the change in wage value between 2004/05 and 2007/08. It simply cites 'authors' calculations based on SPI 2004–05'. That is a reference to the Survey of Personal Incomes (SPI) from that year which the PA news agency has been unable to find. However, the report says that the basic tax allowance of £4,745 in 2004/05 would have been worth £5,140 in 2007/08 prices. This suggests an increase in prices by approximately 8.32% which – allowing for rounding errors – appears close to the 8.45% change in Consumer Prices Index (CPI) between 2005 and 2008. This would mean that an income worth £24,769 in 2007/08 prices would have been worth around £22,866 – again allowing for rounding errors – in 2004/05. What would have happened if salaries had kept up with inflation since 2004/05? Because the income stated is from 2004/05, not 2008 as claimed, the inflation rate since 2008 is not relevant. Between 2005 and 2024 – the last full year for which data is available – prices increased by around 71.45% according to the CPI measurement. This implies that the mean income in 2004/05 (£22,866) would be around £39,202 in 2024 if it had kept up with inflation – again allowing for rounding errors. If comparing CPI figures from March 2005 – the last month of the 2004/05 fiscal year – with the most recent CPI figure in June 2025, inflation has seen prices rise by 79.23%. That would mean the mean salary from 2004/05 would be around £40,981 had it kept up with inflation. Median income in 2004/05 was £16,400. If that income had kept pace with price increases of 71.45% it would be worth £28,117. At the 79.23% inflation rate it would be worth £29,393. What are mean and median incomes today? According to HMRC data, median income before tax was £28,400 in 2023 – the latest year for which an SPI survey has been published. This figure is for individuals, not for households. The mean income in the same year was £40,400. What is the difference between median and mean? Both median and mean are two different ways of measuring the average. The mean is arrived at by adding every value together in a dataset and then dividing it by the number of entries in that dataset. For instance, if calculating mean income, you add together the income of every person in the dataset, whether that be £20,000 per year or £200,000 per year, and then divide that figure by the number of people whose income you have measured. The median is very different. To measure the median you line up all the values in a dataset in ascending order and choose the entry exactly in the middle. The benefit of this approach is that it cannot be skewed by a small number of really high earners at the top. In a way it can be seen as the difference between calculating the average amount that people earn (mean) or calculating what the average person earns (median). Post on X (archived) ONS – Average household income, UK: financial year ending 2019 (archived) Average Salary and Wage in the UK (archived from 2025 and 2020) Wikipedia article (archived) IFS – Publications (archived) IFS- Racing away? Income inequality and the evolution of high incomes (archived) ONS – CPI (archived) – Personal Income Statistics Tables 3.1 to 3.11, 3.16 and 3.17 for the tax year 2022 to 2023 (archived, see Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 for relevant data)