震惊：毕马威英国四名高级合伙人遭逮捕和搜家，连小孩书包都不放过......

毕马威英国四名高级合伙人遭逮捕和搜家，

连小孩书包都不放过.....

.政府抓会计师为作秀？

人是去年抓的，但这事情现在还没完。抓人的时间是2015年 11月25日， 一个寒冷的冬日； 抓人事件发生在贝尔法斯特（Belfast）毕马威办公室， 贝尔法斯特是英国北爱尔兰地区最大的城市，也就是历史上爱尔兰共和军出没的地方； 这个城市是北爱的政治文化和经济中心，也是北爱最大的工业城市。工业基础雄厚，其造船业具有悠久的历史，著名的“泰坦尼克”号便是在这里建造的。也是拉根河入海口的重要港口。毕马威在这个城市的员工规模大约为两百人。被抓的四位全是毕马威的高级合伙人，他们是：

毕马威北爱尔兰地区税务部门管理合伙人Eamonn Donaghy （ KPMG's head of tax in Belfast ）；

毕马威爱尔兰地区企业融资部门管理合伙人Paul
Hollway （ the firm's head of corporate finance in Ireland）；

毕马威该地区主席也是审计部门和交易部门的管理合伙人Jon D'Arcy（ chairman of KPMG’s Belfast office where he lead the audit and  transaction services teams）

审计部合伙人Arthur O'Brien。

来抓人的是英国税务海关总署（英文：Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs，直译为：女皇陛下税务海关总署），是英国的非部长制政府部门之一，主要职责包括征收税项（直接税：包括所得税、公司税（CT）、资本增值税（CGT）、遗产税；和间接税：包括增值税、印花税等）、进口管制及部分形式的国家支援。此部门的前身分别为英国税务局及海关，于2005年4月18日正式合并。下文简称为“税务部门”。

税务部门怀疑毕马威这四为高级合伙人存在逃税行为，于2015年11月25日，突击搜查了毕马威贝尔法斯特办公室之后，将人带走了，还同时搜查了他们的家，据说连小孩的书包都不放过，都进行仔细搜查。

四位合伙人被逮捕之后，毕马威英国即刻聘请律师启动内部调查，并宣布这四位合伙人处于“行政管理式休假” (administrative leave)。此等休假非一般员工能够享受，通常而言是大公司的高管被认为犯大错误之后，在最终未定性之前，而给予的特殊待遇。在安然事件爆发之后，安达信也是首先将安排安然项目的审计合伙人David Duncan 进行此性质休假，不过后来没多久安达信就把Duncan 给开除了。在本案件中，毕马威先是安排这四位合伙人“休假”，但也是没多久，在2016年2月份，报道称，这四位合伙人从毕马威退休。而至今，税务局尚未指控这毕马威这四位前合伙人具体的罪名。

税务局的律师指出，这四位合伙人共同开设了一家物业投资公司 (property investment company),叫JEAP,这四位都是该公司董事，这家公司在2008年亏损严重。

此后，于2009年，这四位合伙人又联手成立一家财务（金融）合伙企业(finance partnership），这个合伙企业向JEAP 提供了约80万至220万英镑的贷款, 然而在仅仅24个月的期间内，这些贷款就成为不良资产。税务局怀疑此间存在逃税行为。

在办公室和家被突然搜查之后，这四位合伙人向高等法院提出司法审查，他们认为税务局在获取法院搜查令的时候存在不当行为，是税务局的官员故意误导了地区法院，从而才获取法院的搜查令。

四位合伙人的律师指出，对会计师进行突然搜查和逮捕，这是一种“核选项”(nuclear option)， 是税务部门的作秀，英国财政大臣刚刚在此前不久宣称要严厉打击逃税行为，税务部门就发动突击搜查和逮捕会计师。在税务局调查这些合伙人过程中，这些合伙人是十分配合的，此前，税务部门还书面感谢这些合伙人在调查中给于的配合和详细回复。但是，在申请搜查令的时候， 税务局的官员向法官隐瞒了这些情况。

对这个搜查令是否合法，目前高院尚未给予裁决，案件还在持续中，继民财经汇将继续关注。

就四名合伙人被逮捕事件，毕马威英国公告指出，这四位合伙人所涉及的行为是他们个人的行为，和毕马威公司自身包括毕马威所服务的客户没有任何关系。

虽然说，此次事件和毕马威公司本身没有关系，但是毕马威的税务咨询业务确实给这家跨国会计巨头带来不少麻烦，甚至差点带来灭顶之灾。最为著名的就是美国毕马威和美国联邦政府之间的税务诉讼案件，
此案件中，联邦政府指控毕马威协助其客户逃税， 差点要对毕马威提及妨碍司法的刑事诉讼，也就是类似安达信在安然事件中所遭受的来自美国司法部的指控，如果毕马威遭受此等刑事指控，则极有可能重蹈安达信解体的覆辙；虽然最后美国司法部放弃起诉毕马威公司，但是司法部还是对毕马威的十几名合伙人提及刑事诉讼，毕马威公司最终也于2005年以接近4.56亿美元的赔偿金额和美国联邦政府达成和解； 于此相关，毕马威还遭遇275位客户的诉讼，最终毕马威的赔偿金额高达1.8亿美元。所以，整个案件毕马威的总赔偿金额高达6.36亿美元。在加拿大，毕马威也面临政府部门的起诉，指控该事务所协助富人逃税，该案件目前尚未结束。

回到本案来，据贝尔法斯特电讯2016年11月29日报道 目前这四为合伙人正申请高院对这个搜查令是否合法进行司法审核，高院尚未给予裁决，案件还在持续中，继民财经汇将继续关注。（以上内容是继民财经汇根据公开的相关报道所整理，欢迎关注继民财经汇 jimincaijing） 

以下为贝尔法斯特电讯2016年11月29日的相关报道：

Former KPMG partners seek judicial review of steps taken to search homes and business
premises

Published 29/11/2016  

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/

HM Revenue and Customs bosses investigating suspected tax evasion were "gleeful" ahead of raids on the homes of four former partners at Belfast accountancy firm KPMG, the High Court heard today.

Counsel for the executives claimed there was no justification for taking the "nuclear option" of
an intrusive operation that also involved trawling through children's school bags.

Details emerged during a challenge to the legality of the process to obtain warrants to search the accountants homes and offices.

Eamonn Donaghy, Jon D'Arcy, Paul Hollway and Arthur O'Brien claim HMRC misled judges into authorising the raids as part of a criminal probe.

All four men were arrested last November, but have not been charged with any wrongdoing.

At the time KPMG said it was cooperating with the inquiry and had placed them on "administrative leave".

In February this year the company announced the partners in its Belfast office subject to the HMRC probe had retired.

KPMG stressed the investigation related solely to the executives' personal affairs and was unrelated to the company's business or its clients.

It emerged in court today that Revenue concerns involved the formation of a separate business partnership and when it was registered.

Loans being issued and written off as bad debt also featured in inquiries.

Mr Donaghy, Mr D'Arcy, Mr Hollway and Mr O'Brien are now seeking to judicially review the steps taken to search their homes and business premises.

Opening their case, barrister Barry Macdonald QC acknowledged the decisions to launch a
criminal investigation or arrest his clients
was not being challenged - although neither action was accepted as reasonable or justified.

"The applicants are making this challenge with their hands tied in relation to the grounds for suspicion, but they completely reject the allegation they were involved in any tax evasion or wrongdoing," he said.

"Even if the suspicion entertained by HMRC is taken at its height, there was no justification for seeking or being granted a warrant to search their homes and offices."

A panel of three judges was told the tax authority should have considered less intrusive steps in an attempt to quell any suspicions.

No attempt was made to put direct questions to the accountants about issues of concern to HMRC.

Instead, it allegedly saw the case as a chance to detain four high-profile men. "They were (motivated) by an improper collateral purpose... on the night before the warrants were executed senior (HMRC) managers were gleefully exchanging emails to the effect that this had the makings of a great story for them," Mr Macdonald contended.

He claimed judges who granted the warrants were given misleading information about the extent of the four accountants' co-operation with inquiries.

Adverse inferences were wrongly drawn from their alleged failure to get back to HMRC during correspondence in 2014, the court heard.

Their barrister argued the truth had been withheld - that HMRC had written thanking for "comprehensive and detailed replies" and pledging to get back to them.

It was claimed that officers arrived in numbers at the executives' private homes.

At one house they searched through children's school bags, while documents in the case also allege officers waited for one of the men outside his bathroom.

"This is a nuclear option, it has to be a last resort and it has to be properly justified,"Mr Macdonald insisted.

Lord Justice Gillen, Lord Justice Weir and Mr Justice Treacy were also taken through
a statement of complaint relied on by HMRC in its applications for the warrants.

It claimed: "This case provides an opportunity to arrest and prosecute four high-profile individuals who are involved in (an)... attack on the revenue
system."

According to Mr Macdonald this further demonstrated a failure to consider steps other
than interfering with his clients' privacy rights.

He also questioned the timing of the raids, which coincided with the British Chancellor's announcement of a crackdown on tax evasion in his Autumn statement.

Later,the court heard the four accountants set up a finance partnership in 2009. But it was claimed that it took nearly a year for a partnership document to be created, with no bank account until August 2011.

Judges were told the initiative was aimed at providing short-term financing to businesses.

It was also said to have lent sums of up to £800,000 and 2.2m euros to another property investment company, JEAP, the four men set up previously.

Counsel for HMRC said that within 24 months the loans to JEAP had been wiped out.

That was said to be a ground for concern that unlawful activity may have occurred - that
the partnership could have been used as a vehicle to reclaim bad debt.

The case continues.