Personal Data: Her Majesty Revenue & Customs Justification For Selling Them To Third Parties

-
security keyHer Majesty Revenue & Customs (HMRC) which is the body responsible for Inland Revenue in the UK holds vast amount of people's data including people’s name, date of birth, address, and bank details.  The HMRC gathers these data from official birth records of people born in the UK.  The government agency also collects personal details from people who have come to live, study or work in the UK or all of the above. This information database helps the HMRC to deal with issues such as benefit payments, tax credits and taxation. 

In addition to using the data it holds for the purposes above the HMRC is now proposing to sell private data it collects from people to third parties.  It is hope that this sale can bring the much needed revenue to the government agency for tackling some of its pressing problems.  HMRC promises to put adequate measures in place to ensure that only reputable third parties can purchase people’s sensitive data. 

Proponents of this proposed deal might justify carrying it out on benefit claimants.  For them, benefit claimants are big burden on the state and tax payers.  Anything that can be done to make these people somewhat contribute to the state for its generosity should be welcome. This can include selling benefit claimants personal details to interested parties.   

The HMRC may also justified its proposed data sale on the ground that DVLA is already doing the same thing.  It has been reported that DVLA sells drivers personal details to third parties for about £3 per driver information.  Considering that the agency holds personal details of several millions of UK drivers this is a lot of money.  It follows from this that if DVLA can do it and make money, HMRC can also do it.

This justification for selling people’s data by HMRC is flawed.  Let us analyse the view that it is okay to sell details of benefit claimants to third parties.  Some benefit claimants include people with disabilities who cannot work and support themselves.  Some are not disabled but are caring for their disabled relatives.   Others have worked before becoming disabled or jobless or old and can no longer work.  Selling the personal data of these people on the ground that the state is looking after them is wrong

There are other unresolved issues with the HMRC proposed selling of people’s sensitive data to third parties.  First, can the HMRC guarantee that only the so called vetted third parties buying the data can make use of them?  Second, how can HMRC be certain that these third parties will not use the data for other nefarious activities such as making cold calls to elderly people or sending junk mails to every person they get hold of their contact information?  Lastly, can people whose data are misused have recourse to remedy such as compensation?

Furthermore, will the HMRC intention to sell people's data violates the Data Protection Act?  The Data Protection Act requires organisations, companies or businesses that collect people’s details to keep these data safe from third parties.  This is why when you are engaging in activities such as opening a bank account or taking out a mortgage your bank will advise you how it intends to use your personal details.  The Data regulatory authority can impose heavy fine on any company disregarding this legislation.

The HMRC may not violate the Data Protection Act by selling people's personal details to third parties.  This is because when collecting information from people, the HMRC does not disclose how the data will be used.  It tends to warn people only about the consequences of providing misleading information including prosecution and fine.   While the HMRC may win this battle on legal ground, it is difficult to envisage how it can win it on moral ground.















































Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Spanish Dog Fouling Law: Are Spanish Politicians Pursuing The Wrong Agenda?

-
Image
 Dog fouling Spain has some of the strictest laws regarding pets possession in Europe. One of its laws governing animal possession in Spain, for example, bans having exotic creatures as pets and requires dog, cat and ferret owners to declare their animals to the authority within three months of bringing them into the country. Until recently, however, Spain has no law nor sanction for failure to clean up after dog fouling in public places. It was up to dog owners whether to clean up such mess. This has now changed following the introduction of the dog fouling law. The new law states that the fine for any person failing to clean up after his or her dog fouling in a public place such as a park or kids play ground should be 1500 euros. The rationale for this legislation is to deter dog owners from leaving their dogs messing up public places such as parks. Regular visitors to parks can testify how the sight of such dog foul can be an eyesore. However, asking dog owners wh
Read more

Social Media Networks: Calls For Tighter Regulations

-
One of the most fascinating technological inventions of the twenty first century is the development of social media networks such as YouTube, Twitter, and Face book. These social media networks make it possible for people to meet new people and make friends, locate old friends and family members, or to form a relationship that can result in marriage. They also provide a platform in the form of advertising for conducting businesses. Despite these benefits provided by the social media networks certain things can go awfully wrong on the networks. The most recent example of how the social media network can be turned into a weapon of criminality is the case last week involving threatening rape and murder messages sent to a number of British women on Twitter. Feminists are attempting to use this incident to rally for support for tighter regulations on activities being conducted within social media networks. Is it possible to control activities within these networks? Having legislat
Read more

Marketing Tricks: How Many Times Have You Fallen Victim?

-
Image
 Fat free food Whereas business owners call them marketing strategies, none business owners regard them as marketing tricks. Regardless of what you like to call them, businesses cannot survive without marketing tricks. Marketing tricks are the flywheel that keeps businesses engine running. We tend not to be concerned about them because of our perception that we are familiar with them and can avoid them. However, a careful look at the marketing tricks used by businesses will reveal that many of us have fallen victims of them in the past and can still fall victim of the malpractice in future. Let us consider two of these popular tricks used in supermarkets. The first marketing trick used by retailers is relating to the slogan “75% reduced fat”. Items labelled 75% reduced fat are often displayed on supermarket shelves. Some of us who are conscious of our health tend to go for them to avoid consuming excess fat. Excess fat in the body is considered to be a risk factor for
Read more