Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 23 November 2023
104. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Finance the implications, if any, for Ireland’s taxation policy in the wake of recent European Court judgement in respect of competition laws; whether Ireland retains absolute authority in respect of taxation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51467/23]
View answer177. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Finance the extent to which he remains satisfied that competency in respect of taxation resides within the Members States throughout the European Union, notwithstanding recent decisions/deliberations. [49984/23]
View answer181. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Finance if he is satisfied that recent binding /non-binding discussion/decision at European level by the ECJ’s advocate general in respect of a judgement (details supplied) is fully in accord with the fact that the competency for taxation resides with the Members States throughout the European Union, and not with the European Institutions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51755/23]
View answer183. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Finance the extent to which he remains satisfied that Ireland remains rightly in control of its taxation policy, notwithstanding developments at EU level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51757/23]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 104, 177, 181 and 183 together.
I understand that the Deputy is referring to the recent Opinion of the Advocate General in the Apple Case.
In 2016, the European Commission issued a Decision finding that Ireland had provided State aid to Apple. Ireland challenged this decision before the General Court of the European Union (GCEU) and in2020, the GCEU issued its judgment which annulled the Commission’s State aid decision of 2016. The Commission appealed the GCEU judgment to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and, on 23 May 2023, the CJEU heard the appeal.
The Advocate General’s Opinion on the Apple case was published on 9 November 2023. The Advocate General analyses the legal aspects of the case in detail and, separately from the deliberations of the Court, provides an Opinion regarding the issue being heard. It is however important to bear in mind that this Opinion does not form part of the Court of Justice of the European Union judgment but is considered by the Court when arriving at its final ruling. The timing of the judgment is at the discretion of the Court.
As this matter is still the subject of legal proceedings, it is not possible to comment on any of the elements of the legal case.
Ireland has always been, and continues to be, a strong proponent of unanimity in tax matters at EU level. Tax Sovereignty is an area close to the heart of Irish citizens and was one of the reasons the Irish people initially rejected the Lisbon Treaty. A subsequent Protocol to the Treaty provided guarantees in relation to tax sovereignty, which paved the way for the Treaty's approval in Ireland.
Ireland has shown that we are willing to engage with and agree EU tax directives that seek to implement agreed international best practices in a consistent manner across the EU. Through negotiations, Ireland always maintain the principle that matters of direct taxation remain a Member State competence under the treaties, and tax harmonization is contrary to that principle.
Taxation remains one of the most effective policy levers available to any Government, and each Member State has developed a tax mix appropriate to their particular economy. We fundamentally believe that tax competition is an important policy tool, particularly for smaller Member States, provided that competition is fair and based on substance. The recently published Advocate General’s Opinion on the Apple case does not have any bearing on that position.
Ireland’s participation in global and European tax reform does not indicate that we are conceding any sovereignty in tax matters. Ireland is a proponent of multilateralism being the best solution to global tax problems and this is what underpins our position on EU tax matters and our decisions to join international consensus on the Two Pillared Agreement at the OECD.
On this basis I am satisfied that taxation is, and will continue to remain, a national competence for EU Member States.
