What Is Cheating The Public Revenue At Common Law?

Cheating the public revenue at common law is a criminal offence that has a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

What Is The Nature Of The Cheating Offence?

R v Hudson [1956] 2 QB 252 explained the nature of the offence:

‘The offence of making a false statement tending to prejudice the Queen and the Public Revenue with intent to defraud the Queen is, and always has been, a common law misdemeanour, and includes the offence of causing to be delivered to an inspector of taxes accounts relating to the profits of a business which falsely and fraudulently state the profits to be less than they actually were.’

Whilst this is a very serious offence, it appears to be rarely prosecuted. A Freedom of Information Act request response from HMRC on 18 August 2025 advised:

For the tax year 2024-25 we have recorded that there were:
• 42 charges of Common Law – Cheat the Public Revenue and
• 56 charges of Common Law – Conspiracy to Cheat the Public Revenue

Is Recklessness Sufficient To Cheat?

Recklessness is usually considered insufficient to reach the threshold of cheating.

In the case of R v Godir [2018] EWCA Crim 2294 the Court said:

“Knowingly” is something different in law from “recklessness”. Knowingly connotes something more than mere recklessness. In simple terms, one can be said to know something if one is absolutely sure that it is so. Being reckless, on the other hand, means merely taking unjustified risks (see R v G [2004] 1 AC 1034; Blackstone 2018 paragraph A2.6 and A2.14).

17. “Wilful blindness” can equate to knowledge in some circumstances but that, again, is different to “recklessness”.

No Positive Act Required

You do not need to do anything as such to be found guilty of cheating the revenue In R v Mavji [1986] STC 508 the Court of Appeal said:

In our judgment, ‘cheating the revenue’ can take place without any positive act of deceit or, to adopt and respectfully endorse the words of Drake J when ruling on this matter in the appellant’s first trial:

‘The common law offence of cheating does not necessarily require a false representation, either by words or conduct. Cheating can include any form of fraudulent conduct which results in diverting money from the Revenue and in depriving the Revenue of money to which it is entitled.’

This appellant was in circumstances in which he had a statutory duty to make value added tax returns and to pay over to the Crown the value added tax due. He dishonestly failed to do either. Accordingly, he was guilty of cheating HM the Queen and the public revenue. No further act or omission required to be alleged or proved.