An email circulating reads:
“At first I thought this was funny…then I realized the awful truth of it.
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
At which he’s fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries, then
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won’t be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers,
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He’s good and sore.
Then tax his coffin ,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he’s laid.
Put these words
upon his tomb,
” Taxes drove me
to my doom…”
When he’s gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
In my long article in the first issue of Irish Left Review on Ireland’s corporate tax regime I made the point that Ireland in effect sells its abilities to make tax laws to profit hungry MNCs, in much the same way as it sells to the rights to our natural resources to large oil companies. That is, whatever economic benefit there is, and its small, goes to the ‘agents’ who negotiate the deal, with very little, if any, benefit appearing in the economy.
Recently these arrangements, known as the Double Irish with the Dutch Sandwich have been given a lot of attention and are often explained. For example, see this New York Times info graphic. However, while listening to Jim Stewart’s interview on Morning Ireland last Friday in a conversation about Google’s ‘grilling’ before the UK’s Public Accounts Committee on taxation, I found out that the ‘Dutch Sandwich’ is no longer used, and instead Google’s earnings from its EMEA market goes from Google Ireland to Google Ireland Holdings, which is registered in a solicitor’s office at 70 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay and also in Bermuda. So, by passing these to the Bermuda registered company, the earnings go straight to Bermuda. Google Ireland Holdings has no employees and is ‘owned’ by Google Bermuda which also has no employees. Both are unlimited companies, so under Irish law, they do not have to publish accounts.
via Irish Left Review.
via Irish Left Review.
Revenue will ruthlessly bring to bear the full arsenal of laws at its disposal to enforce the new tax.
If necessary Revenue will deduct the tax directly from the salary, pension or bank accounts of those who fail to co-operate.
People can only judge for themselves Revenue’s record for pursuing people…We have very extensive data. We will pursue. We’ve done it in the past.
Well I’d like to accept Ms. Feehily’s invitation and judge her organisation’s record of pursuing people.
A report in last Sunday’s Independent reveals that not one person has been prosecuted over the Ansbacher tax criminality.
Ms. Feehily extends three excuses for her organisation’s disgraceful failure in bringing the Ansbacher white-collar criminals to account.
Excuse one: A lack of original documentation.
An essential requirement for a successful criminal prosecution is original documents. There were very few original documents available and there was no legal mechanism to compel Caymen entities to produce such documents.
This excuse is, of course, bullshit. There is a mountain of good quality evidence available to Revenue if it had a mind to prosecute.
The reason this good quality evidence has never been used is simple – it would most likely result in damaging the interests of very influential and powerful people.
Excuse two: Time elapsed has made prosecutions impossible.
While many cases passed the serious evasion test to be considered for prosecution, the time elapsed – typically in excess of 10 years since the alleged offence occurred – meant it would not be possible to mount a successful prosecution.
Ms. Feehily’s admission that many cases passed the serious evasion test for prosecution directly contradicts her first excuse re original documents.
The ‘time lapsed’ excuse is the most powerful strategy employed by state agencies when it comes to protecting influential and powerful people.
It is no accident, in my opinion, that almost every major white-collar scandal is strung out over many years in order to benefit from the ‘time lapse’ excuse.
Excuse three: Some of the criminals were too old or too dead.
Being too old will not be accepted as an excuse by Revenue for failing to pay the property tax. This excuse is strictly reserved for influential and powerful people.
Neither will death be accepted as an excuse. If an ordinary citizen undervalues his property and the property is sold on after his death the tax due, with interest, will be extracted from the new owners.
Influential and powerful people are exempt from such exacting laws. For example, when the criminal politician Haughey died his wealth was passed on to his family with no response from Revenue.
In functional democracies such ill-gotten wealth is heavily taxed or even seized outright.
Returning to Ms. Feehily’s invitation to people to judge Revenue’s record of pursuing people I think the following sums up what most ordinary people think.
The very fact that so called law enforcement agencies like Revenue and the Financial Regulator are incapable or unwilling to enforce the law when dealing with white-collar crime but are more than efficient in enforcing the law against ordinary citizens suggests that there is indeed one law for the rich and another for the peasants.
Minister of State for Finance Brian Hayes said yesterday lots of elderly people told him they were “well off” because they did not have mortgages. “I think we need to realize that the one group of people in this country who have come through this crash and still have their incomes intact are pensioners,” he said.
“But it seems to me that the Irish political system will never countenance cutbacks on the elderly. My view is that all this needs to be on the table,” he said.
Mr. Hayes said pensioners were people with “common sense and judgment” who would understand the need to look at the State’s contribution to them. This would not be done in “some kind of hair-shirt way” but rather in a “sensible” manner.
What the minister appears to be saying is old people are on the pigs back as they have no mortgages. We must tax them severely for this crime. Why should they have a right to a happy retirement when the rest of the country is suffering? They have no right to a jolly old age. Look at me even I am suffering due to the public scrutiny of travel expenses. This you realize has a severe impact on my take-home pay.
One wonders, whether the legions of grey matter will take to the streets.