R v Creddick Price
[2023] EWCA Crim 1060
R v Ben Stewart Richardson
25 September 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 1286
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of hiding money from the taxman. He argued the money wasn't illegal, but the court said it was because it included unpaid taxes. His appeal was rejected.
Key Facts
- •Ben Stewart Richardson pleaded guilty to various tax evasion and concealing criminal property charges.
- •He was sentenced to six years' imprisonment.
- •He applied for an extension of time to appeal his conviction for concealing criminal property (count 4).
- •Count 4 involved £219,123 allegedly concealed, which the applicant argued was not criminal property.
- •The funds came from SBR (UK) Ltd, a company involved in tax evasion.
- •The prosecution argued the money represented, at least in part, benefit from VAT evasion.
Legal Principles
Definition of 'criminal property' under section 340(3) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA).
POCA 2002, section 340(3)
Legitimate trading profits undeclared to HMRC may constitute criminal property if they represent, at least in part, the unpaid tax.
R v K(I) [2007] EWCA Crim 491
The money laundering provisions of POCA extend to the fruits of cheating the Revenue.
R v K(I) [2007] EWCA Crim 491, paragraph 24
It is immaterial who carried out the conduct or who benefited from it for the purposes of determining criminal property.
POCA 2002, section 340(4)
Outcomes
Application for extension of time to appeal and application for leave to appeal against conviction on count 4 were refused.
The £219,123 was deemed criminal property as it formed part of SBR (UK)'s funds which included VAT owed to HMRC. The applicant's arguments were deemed misconceived.