1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156 
Here's to Customs
Page 9
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Far be it for Commercial Motor to offer anything other than whole-hearted support for the latest move by HM Customs and Excise to conduct a vigorous crackdown on "cherry cheats". They're putting honest operators out of business, never mind the 145om in lost revenue.
However, there's one question we're curious to ask (and it's one that's fairly popular of late). That question is: "Why now?"
Why in particular has Customs decided to put more resources into a new campaign aimed at cracking down on the long-standing problem of fuel fraud?
And why, having said that the government "won't tolerate" the dangers imposed on all of us by cowboy operators and fuel launderers, does it go on to say in its press release that it intends to cut the problem "...to only 2% of the market" by 31 March 2,0o6? Should we assume that a 2% level of fuel fraud is acceptable? Or that is it merely undetectable? Or does it represent a level at which enforcement costs outweigh the benefits of any further reduction?