On the positive side, does not this make it easier for newspapers, or anyone else for that matter, to offer rewards to junior staff and secretaries, to spill the beans when they see abuses of privelege in public life ? What is sauce for the goose.......

nemo, nivillac, france

The simplest worldwide solution is transactional tax which would benefit individuals, governments as well as industry.
http://www.singletax.us
http://www.apttax.com

Gerson, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

The specific bank in Liechtenstein is called LGT, and the data was stolen in 2002 by an external IT contractor. This person was already wanted internationally for cheque fraud in Spain, so their due diligence must have failed badly. He was then arrasted and ordered to hand over the data which he apparently did - he just "forgot" to mention he had a copy..

As for the Government sponsoring a thief - I think in the case of New Labour this is merely professional courtesy..

More details (if you read German) can be found at the NZZ newspaper website www.nzz.ch.

Peter Baker, Zurich,

So the government is allowed to traffic in stolen goods now?
This is a dangerous new precedent whereby datae will be hawked around the world to the highest bidder.
They want your DNA,they want you to carry ID cards and yet before they have even started,they are involved in the transfer of stolen goods from digital data
Will the last one to leave please turn out the lights!

James, london, uk

£100,00 of UK taxpayers money - that's pretty good for a dishonest days work!!

What have we come to?

Andy Iddon, London, UK

If James Bond can murder someone in the name of the State what's all the fuss about a theft?

We sheeple are all too governable IMHO

Every generation needs rebels and tax dodgers to keep the Power of the State in check

bill skyes, walsall,

This just doesn't sound right. This should be done, however difficult, through proper channels. Paying criminals for private data is wrong - whether it is to pursue other 'criminals' or not.

Tim, London,

Evidence obtained illegaly is inadmissable.
End of story
Yet again some very senior civil servants are going to get their hands smacked very publicly.
And the court costs ? They will be enormous.
Who will pay in then end ?
Why ,we will be paying for this incompetence of course.

David Nammory, Liverpool,

£100.000.oo a small amount and money well spent concidering how much money in owed revinues that our country will now regain from these suoper rich tax dodgers, ain`t these people got enough money already without making us poor people pay all of our country`s bills through tax returns ? our taxes will be lowered once the these super rich and their mates who run our country start paying their proper dues like the common working man does, every man woman and child that ain`t in the super rich bracket will benifit from these new tactics that our civil servents are now making to get this money returned to the British coffers, keep up the good work boys and dont let these rich powerfull & influencial tax dodgers get away with it i say.

paddy conroy, newcastle upon tyne, england

I just wonder if all the names that are found will be brought to the surface, or just the selected few, after all sleaze is the word these days is it not ? I mean it could be the hand that feeds them, so there is not much chance of that getting bitten, on the past track record.

edward harford, connahs quay, uk

Who cares how the information was acquired? This is simply a case of the end justifying the means. I suspect those complaining that HMRC are handling stolen goods have a lot to hide themselves.

It would appear that no UK laws were broken in acquiring the data so why all the fuss? Surely crown immunity would apply in any case.

HMRC are to be commended for adopting a no-nonsense approach in dealing with tax-evading scumbags who cost every one of us dear and undermine society as a whole by their selfish behaviour.

Ian, Liverpool, Merseyside

Oh how wonderful it would be to see the Inland Revenue raided by police and prosecuted by the CPS - did no-one consider the legal implications before handing over the money?
Maybe they bought a very expensive disc with free data LOL

Sue, poole, uk

Please visit the international tax forum at www.taxprecision.com to find a discussion on this topic.

Frank, London, UK

Even if the information cannot be used in court the people would be investigated under civil procedures so the court bit becomes irrelevant.

I pay my taxes and see no reason these people should get away with paying less than is due.

Chris, London,

Surely big earners can sidestep this in the future by accepting a minimum wage salary with huge bonuses, share options etc. - which are all tax exempt.

Howard, Manchester,

Nothing is a crime if the government is doing it.

Richard, London, England

Section 22 of the Theft Act 1968 deals with the offence of "handling stolen goods" and states:
(1) A person handles stolen goods if (otherwise than
in the course of his stealing) knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so.
(2) A person guilty of handling stolen goods shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
I rest my case M'Lud !

Nigel Thain, Milton Keynes, UK

and this government constantly state that your private details on UK Data Bases are AFE in their hands. Hypocrites

Chris, FRance,

Wish I had the money to hide away in Liechtenstein.

Farrukh, Woking, UK

This will be good news for the metals. Not so good news for fiat.

Jack, Staffordshire,

Fantastic - the Government has just given the moral green light for any fraudster to get a job with access to sensitive data and sell it on to any foreign power.

Make sure you are not a British Citizen and it's not even treason. Better check the credentials of all those foreigners working for the British Government.

The Britsh government will not really be in a postion to complain about the sale since it will be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Neill, Maidstone, Kent

To Michael Murray,

Jersey banks have already disclosed customer data... in the first few months of last year

Matt, Chelmsford, Essex

Sections 1 to 3 of The Computer Misuse Act 1990 set out the criminal offences of unauthorised access and use of computer data. Section 8 specifies that if facilitating such in another country access would be an offence in that country then it shall also be an offence in this country if there is a connection between this country and the act of gaining unauthorised access to the data.

By paying someone to steal the data the Revenue has facilitated that theft and an offence may have been committed under our law. Perhaps the CPS ought to get involved?

Peter Ryder, Middlewich, UK

Excellent!

Michael Murray, Bath, UK

Jersey next, then the Bahamas, then the Cayman islands, Monaco,Geneva, Andorra, wherever the crooks and fat cats hide their fortunes. If the govt wants to be kind to those otherthan criminals, they cold offer tolet themtransfer the sums to British banksandpay 40% British income tax on the sum plus 25% of the remainer as a fine for tax evasion.

Pete, London, LONDON, england

Two wrongs don't make a right - unless you are the Government in which case they can do what they like and the heck with anybody who has a different opinion*. HMRC have just paid a convicted criminal £100,000 of taxpayers' money for the results of his crime. Every day I think this Government can't surprise me anymore and each day they prove me wrong. Wonder what Geroge Orwell would have made of this, or as we now refer to him: Spinnin' George! *Comments above cleaned up from what I really think of this Government for public consumption ;o)

John Thorpe, Stroud, UK

1/ The Inland Revenue must then be guilty of Recieving Stolen Goods.
2/ Can they then use this stolen information as evidence in a UK Court?

MikeO, Harlech, Wales, UK

The govt reassures us that the proposed national identity card database will be secure, meanwhile the taxman is busy funding the very sort of data thieves who would love to get their hands on all our details. It is utter lunacy.

The British government has always had a very sensible public policy of not paying ransoms for hostages, so to discourage further hostage-taking. The same principle should apply here. You do not pay a thief for his stolen information, because other potential thieves will surely take notice.

D Rochedale, Liverpool, UK

Shouldn't the tax authorities be prosecuted for receiving stolen goods

Al, Bangkok,

Does the price differential between £3.2m and £100,000 reflect the difference in not only numbers of names (750 v 100) but also the wealth of those names? Or is the British government better at negotiating with criminals than the Germans? Shouldn't we be told?

Peter Simson, Menzingen, Switzerland

I have always considered second passport to be of good use. Like in this case - big brother will loot their own yard and leave Liberians or Panamanians in peace.

Matthew, Barcelona,

Surely the tax authorities are in receipt of stolen goods and as such are in breach of our laws? Dont get me wrong, I have no sympathy for those super rich tax dodgers. I pay mine and I bet they pay less than I do

Alan, Chelmsford, Essex

So now every hacker and unscrupulous bank employee out there knows there is a lucrative market for information. Watch the incidence of information theft rocket. The government is using our money to promote crime on an international scale.

Parvati P., London,

The super rich shouldn't be so super stupid to park their coins at a Liechtenstein bank. Sooner or later Europe would have forced Liechtenstein to play nice and hand over bank info or face some economic sanctions.
The best places to park your cash are in South-East Asia now.

Ed, Boston, USA

For those who are asking ... "Stolen evidence cannot be used in court, but facts learned can be verified."

In short, it's not like pinching someone's car and presenting the car as evidence, which would be thrown out. Once you've seen what someone has in a Liechtenstein bank, you can easily demonstrate that they've received income without paying any tax on it.

Doesn't make much of a moral argument, I know, but it's how the law stands - or used to the last time I looked hard at it.

Paul Heyes, Sheffield, England

Could it be reasoned that the Government is profiting by paying monies to a criminal for information of a sensitive nature? Who therefore is the real criminal? The one getting the information or the one selling it on? And in the light of recent Government blunders in the handling of sensitive information, can the Government really be trusted with the protection of this new information. Can they be sure that all the names on the list are actually "tax-dodgers"?

Rob, chelmsford, essex

Steve of Belfast's comments are typically uninformed hogwash. Sovereign legal issues have nothing to do with his, somewhat biased, thoughts on tax equality.

But seeing as he brought it up . . . what is a "fair share"? If I lived in the UK, I would pay around GBP200k to the tax man (and would not receive anything by way of services). By my calculation, I would be paying his share and about 29 others.

I would love to be made to pay his fair share.

David f, Singapore, singapore

Is this the same HMRC who recently "lost" 25m citizens' personal detail records in the postal system?
Apparently there is now an active market in buying and selling private information even at government level.
Evidently people holding secure information are open to bribery, as if we didn't already know.I must say that the £100k here sounds a pretty cheap price, considering, but I'm no expert.
And some people still approve of a national DNA database?
WAKE UP, PEOPLE!

MikeM, St. Albans, England

How is this Liechtenstein bank coping since these revelations of private account leakage came out? Is the name of the Liechtenstein bank known? Is it more than one Liechtenstein bank?

Liechtenstein banks are sure to have many customers who are fully acting within the law, including foreign depositors. They must have some concern their private data has been bundled in with the "tax dodgers".

In those circumstances, as a person who complies with the law and meets tax obligations, I'm not sure how I would feel to learn German / British authorities might now have access to personal, private and confidential data about me.

For example, if news broke that the Chinese had paid an bank informant to get them private details of accounts in a UK bank in pursuit of "Chinese tax evaders" - I would surely close my account if the name of the UK bank came to light..

Who would want the Chinese pouring over their data - no matter if it's for some supposedly superior righteous cause.

David S, Manchester, UK

I have long-thought the German government could teach the British government a thing or two . . . but jack-booting over other nation's laws was not what I meant.

alex f, london, uk

Will these actions stand up in court - the gov't paying a thief for peoples' personal data ?

I wonder how many Labour MPs are in these lists ?

Stan(expat), USA, USA

About time! maybe, just maybe the super rich might be fined? if so where will the money go and to whom. The poor?. no straight to the tax man and on to over paid mp's.

Darren Hopkins, somersham, cambridgeshire

Tax them all so much that they will all have to sign up for council houses !!!

Ian Payne, WALSALL,

I pay PAYE on me wages. 23K turns into about 14K after tax, NI, Super ann.

Shouldnt we all pay our share and be made to like me ?

Steve, belfast,

Surely it is illegal to be the receiver of stolen goods?It appears there is one law for the government, another for its citizens! The ends do not justify the means, yet again our govenment disgraces itself

Leslie Corrin, Southport, England.

Oops!

steveH, London, UK

Whatever the rights and wrongs of offshore tax havens, it surely cannot be right for the British Government to buy confidential data that was stolen.
If it was UK government data, they would have been up in arms, with writs flying around the place.

Patrick, Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

If the evidence has been obtained illegally, would it not be inadmissible in court?

Matt, Weymouth,