In just seven weeks, the DIRT inquiry has exposed the most intimate details of the relationship between the State's various agencies and the financial institutions. In much the same timeframe, it has promised to deliver its final report and hopes its deliberations will result in the recouping of millions of pounds in unpaid DIRT for the Exchequer.
The committee's greatest challenge now is to decide whether AIB had an agreement - however informal - with the Revenue in 1991 to write off its DIRT liabilities dating back to 1986.
The bank has made a stout defence of its position but has singularly failed to provide strong proof to support its claims. In a parting shot to the committee yesterday, its senior counsel, Mr Dermot Gleeson, suggested the inquiry might not be the appropriate forum to decide the matter as the committee could not be viewed as being impartial when it came to adjudicating on issues of tax collection.
Mr Gleeson implied AIB may ultimately have to take its dispute with the Revenue to the courts for a resolution.
For its part, the Revenue has managed to hold its ground, maintaining it never did a deal. In its closing submission, the Revenue chairman, Mr Dermot Quigley, dismissed AIB's amnesty claim as "no more than wishful thinking".
The most difficult point to decide is why the Revenue failed to collect the unpaid DIRT - estimated to be between £35 million and £100 million - from the bank in 1991 when it conducted meetings with AIB on bogus non-resident accounts.
The committee will have to carefully consider why AIB's file was left on a shelf in Revenue for almost seven years and was only reopened following the "leaking" of an internal AIB document to the Sunday Independent last year.
The committee will also have to look at the scale of non-compliance with DIRT legislation throughout the entire financial sector. After AIB, the State-owned ACCBank has come under the spotlight as being one of the worst offenders when it came to opening bogus non-resident accounts for its customers in the 1980s and 1990s.
In its closing submission, the bank's senior counsel, Mr Paul Gallagher, accepted the bank's culpability in failing to comply fully with its obligations on DIRT but urged the committee to fairly consider its evidence. "To suggest there was a culture of non-compliance where the organisation was trying to take steps to rectify that would be wholly unfair," he said.
Like AIB, ACC is hotly disputing the scale of its potential DIRT liability which seems to lie somewhere between £1.4 million and £17.5 million.
The Department of Finance and the Central Bank have acknowledged certain shortcomings arising out of the close examination of its inaction in relation to bogus non-resident for many years and has submitted recommendations for the committee to consider which it believes would guard against any future lapses.
The Department of Finance secretary general, Mr Paddy Mullarkey, urged the committee to examine the need for a more structured and regular review by the Department and the Revenue Commissioners of the adequacy of its powers.
Meanwhile, the Central Bank governor, Mr Maurice O'Connell, said it was looking at ways of evaluating the degree of tax compliance which exists within each financial institution. This could include requiring auditors to make regular reports on tax compliance to the Central Bank.
The Revenue has recommended the institution of a formalised annual review with the Minister of Finance on specific problems with the application of the tax code.
The committee chairman, Mr Jim Mitchell, has undertaken to deliver its report before Christmas, assuring all parties to the inquiry they will be treated fairly. Over the seven weeks, it has heard evidence from 142 witnesses and evaluated 150,000 documents. It is a testimony to its diligence that it has brought the hearings to a conclusion on schedule.
Mr Mitchell believes the inquiry has made history and provides a template for future inquiries and, with the Revenue continuing to audit all of the financial institutions to compile tax demands for unpaid DIRT going back to 1986, it can claim great credit for its role in recouping substantial amounts of tax for the Exchequer.