Sir, – Would it not be ironic if the decision on tax, by the European Commission, led to the fall of the Government that restored fiscal sanity to the country and its replacement by those who vehemently opposed those measures? Here comes the Irish version of Greece. – Yours, etc,
JERRY KELLEHER,
Rathmines,
Dublin 6.
Sir, – We must first recognise that the decision by the European Commission is not equivalent to a court ruling but is instead a finding. In Ireland, companies pay tax on the economic activity that occurs within our jurisdiction. The European Commission ruling does not want us to do this, but appears to want us to claim tax which is not due to us, and may be due to other states. The simple fact is that we are not entitled to this tax, and we have no right to collect it.
The findings by the European Commission are somewhat contradictory in acknowledging that other states may be entitled to some of the €13 billion, and should they collect it then less would be due to Ireland. Surely we, as a state, are entitled to the amount of tax we are due for Apple’s economic activities here and, as such, we are either entitled to collect a certain amount of tax or not – the tax due to us should not be beholden to the actions of other states.
While the European Commission claims that Apple was charged an effective rate of 0.005 per cent, it fails to acknowledge that this is on an amount which includes the company’s profits in other states and therefore tax payable on it would be due in those jurisdictions and not in Ireland.
To say that we implemented such an effective corporate tax rate completely misconstrues the facts, and is tantamount to false allegations against Ireland which ultimately damage our international reputation.
If the Government decided not to appeal this decision, it would be a disservice to the public and would not work to secure the long-term future of our economy.
Our tax code is based on a statutory footing, and the Revenue Commissioners strictly enforce our tax policy, as passed by the Oireachtas, without deviation. As such, it is not possible for them to offer a “sweetheart deal” to any company whatsoever.
The term “tax haven” has been used by many in relation to the findings of the European Commission, and indeed started during the US Senate debates on this very issue in 2014; however, a difference in corporation tax rates between two different countries does not make one a tax haven. It has become clear over previous years that other countries with a higher headline rate of corporate tax, in practice, charge a lower effective rate than Ireland.
A failure to refute these false allegations against Ireland, and challenge them in court, would certainly create more profound damage to our international reputation by accepting guilt when we have done nothing wrong. It is not unusual for findings of the European Commission to be challenged and overturned by the courts.
We must defend our reputation through the non-political court process and rebuff the attempts of the European Commission to indirectly influence our tax system under the guise of competition. Failure to do this would be an abject failure by the Government to serve the interests of our citizens, the future of our economy, and our country’s reputation as a whole. – Yours, etc,
ALAN FARRELL TD,
Fine Gael,
Dáil Éireann,
Kildare Street,
Dublin 2.
Sir, – It is interesting, and somewhat nauseating, to hear the Government and representatives of big business argue that the European Commission’s Apple decision must be challenged and overturned or multinational corporations will be forced to leave the country.
It’s a shame that there wasn’t a similar concern for the thousands of Irish citizens forced to leave the country due to the imposition of savage austerity measures in recent years. – Yours, etc,
RODDY KEENAN,
Bromsgrove,
Worcestershire,
England.
A chara, – In the week that’s in it, I have to say that the members of the Independent Alliance are showing us that they are not fit for “senior hurling” yet. Maybe hurling on the ditch is more their sport. – Is mise,
PAT BURKE WALSH,
Gorey,
Co Wexford.
Sir, – A bumbling Government, a greedy multinational and an arrogant European Commission all add up to one of those situations where it’s simply impossible to pick a winner. – Yours, etc,
NORMAN DAVIES,
Bray,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – I read that the Independent Alliance is calling for the Dáil to be used as a medium to help resolve the Apple tax crisis. How very apt, given that what it has achieved thus far has neither been rare nor well done. – Yours, etc,
NUALA DELANEY,
Killiney, Co Dublin.
A chara, – Have you noticed that all your letters calling for a Brexit-style exit from the EU in the wake of the European Commission decision on Apple have been from people based in England?
It seems our neighbours across the sea are desperate for a companion to join them on their journey. However, the aim of the EU transcends economic benefits. It is also about promoting integration, co-operation and peace across the Continent. To be a mature member of the EU, we have to accept that not every law and regulation will be in our favour.
Let’s keep in mind that our prosperity has grown immensely since we joined the EEC in 1973. Surely we have more competitive advantage than unpopular tax breaks for multibillion-dollar corporations? – Is mise,
NATASHA BROWNE.
Bellevue Demesne,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – Will the patriotic campaign by some commentators to protect Ireland’s sovereignty and independence with regard to the Apple tax issue include other issues of contention with the European Commission, such as water charges? – Yours, etc,
RORY STURDY,
Rathmolyon,
Co Meath.
Sir, – The corporate tax rate in Ireland for trading income is 12.5 per cent. Apple has chosen to credit sales of its products to an Irish account in the same way as if that product had been bought in a shop in Ireland, even though it was bought outside the country. The income received by Apple is trading income and should be taxed at 12.5 per cent. It was not, and that is a fact.
Another fact is that the Irish Government knew this. It also knew the EU was investigating this fact, and it also knew what the outcome would be because it is a fact that Apple was not paying 12.5 per cent tax on its trading income and was allowed to get away with not doing so by the deliberate decision of the Irish Government to look the other way.
For reasons that are not clear, Fine Gael has chosen to side with Apple and has given a signed blank taxpayer cheque to pay for legal fees to take a legal case against the interests of the Irish people.
So we can at least dispense with the myth that Fine Gael wouldn’t have also given the banks a blank cheque if it had been in government between 2007 to 2010.
Fine Gael is trying to argue that if Apple doesn’t get its way then it will leave Ireland. Where will it go to? Where else in the EU can it set up and pay less than the tax it pays using Ireland? So that’s another bluff we can ignore.
The facts in this case are simple and clear. Apple did not pay the correct tax, the Irish Government knew that and chose to do nothing. It took the EU to reveal, yet again, that we have no clothes when it comes to regulatory governance.
The moral case is even stronger. Even if not one cent of this money were used for reducing tax, it could still improve the lives of thousands and thousands of Irish people. The children who need all manner of help with different needs. The elderly who need various home help facilities. The Garda stations that need to be updated and expanded, the schools and communities that need physical sports and other facilities.
So we have to ask why exactly have Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan been so quick to throw the Irish people under the bus of corporate greed a second time, and why is Fine Gael so scared of Apple that it will do anything Apple tells it to do. – Yours, etc,
DESMOND FITZGERALD,
Canary Wharf,
London.
Sir, – Our leaders seem divided on how to proceed with the Apple tax windfall and unsure about what to do. Can I suggest they Google the answer? – Yours, etc,
JUDITH GOLDBERGER,
Donnybrook,
Dublin 4.
Sir, – Apple or no Apple, I’m skint. – Yours, etc,
LARRY DUNNE,
Rosslare Harbour,
Co Wexford.
Sir, – Media coverage of the European Commission’s announcement regarding Apple’s tax treatment in Ireland has referenced the term “double Irish”. Is this the same as a full Irish, just with added gravy? – Yours, etc,
KEVIN KERNAN,
Goatstown,
Dublin 14.
Sir, – I wonder if this decision had been made in favour of the Greek government whether it would consider appealing it. – Yours, etc,
BRENDAN McMAHON,
Naas, Co Kildare.
Sir, – When the mainstream media outlets have finished picking their way gingerly through the Apple tax story, being careful not to offend anyone powerful or wealthy, the main point of this sorry outrage is the final nail in the coffin of an arrogant and out-of-touch Government. – Yours, etc,
JOHN HANAMY,
Templeogue Road,
Dublin 6W.
Sir, – Official Ireland and its granny seem (unconvincingly) concerned that multinational companies might pull out because Apple has been told to pay its taxes. Imagine that! There is nothing to worry about; even at 12.5 per cent, Apple would still be doing comparatively very well in Ireland. The problem for Apple is that it only paid less than 0.5 per cent tax.
The problem for Ireland is different. As a teacher, since 2008 I have lost 30 per cent of my income in additional taxes. So my additional taxes have subsidised Apple, which doesn’t want to pay its taxes! And I’m one of the lucky ones! There are other unfortunates, such as newly appointed teachers, nurses and gardaí who do the same work on a lower pay scale. And Michael Noonan, who will get a €2,000 pay rise in April, wants to appeal the case and not take the money Apple owes Ireland in tax. Seriously? Was it for this? – Yours, etc,
PETER LYDON,
Clondalkin, Dublin 22.
Sir, – I am sure that I am not alone as a PAYE taxpayer in Ireland for over 40 years in welcoming Prof Joseph Stiglitz’s outspoken words concerning Apple’s underpayment of some €13 billion in taxes (“Stiglitz urges Ireland not to challenge ruling”, September 1st). Never in history, surely, has there been a clearer example of one law for the rich and one law for the poor. How unfortunate it is that democratically elected governments have supported the rich in what is in effect a conspiracy against the poor. – Yours, etc,
Dr GERALD MORGAN,
Dublin 2.
Sir, – On one or two occasions over the last 40 years of paying tax, I received small refunds due to overpayment. I never appealed this to the Revenue. It wouldn’t have felt right. – Yours, etc,
GEOFF SCARGILL,
Bray, Co Wicklow.