Vol. 488 No. 1
24 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Finance if he is satisfied that the practice of the marketing of products with similar effects is not common in the financial sector in view of the alleged tax evasion schemes being marketed by National Irish Bank; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5808/98]
Information on the marketing of particular financial products would reside, if at all, with the Central Bank and, in the case of tax evasion, with the Revenue Commissioners in so far as such data comes to their attention in the course of their operations. On 26 January last I wrote to the Governor of the Central Bank requesting him to clarify the position in so far as it might relate to exchange controls. I also asked him to report to me separately on the implications, if any, for all aspects of banking supervision. The Governor responded to me on 28 January to the effect that he is having these issues investigated and will report to me as soon as possible. To date, I have not received an interim or preliminary report.
As the Deputy is well aware, the examination and pursuit of particular tax cases is a matter for the Revenue Commissioners. This is the position which has applied — it has been accepted in the House — since the foundation of the State. The Minister for Finance does not get involved in individual cases. However, I assure the House that the investigations are proceeding as a matter of priority. As I have made clear on a number of occasions, I have asked the Revenue Commissioners and my Department to review the adequacy of Revenue powers following the report of the McCracken tribunal. I have also said that if additional powers are shown to be desirable and likely to be effective, then proposals to enhance Revenue's powers will be brought forward. However, before taking such an initiative it will be necessary to have all the relevant information from the series of inquiries currently under way. The Moriarty tribunal is specifically charged with making recommendations on banking supervision, the protection of State revenue and offshore accounts.
Nonetheless, for the benefit of the House I would not rule out new provisions if they were shown to be necessary, for example, to require financial institutions to report to Revenue where they become aware that financial products sold by them may facilitate tax evasion or to notify Revenue where funds have been transferred in certain circumstances to or from particular off-shore locations. There may also be new powers for Revenue to access bank accounts where there are reasonable grounds to believe that certain accounts are being or may be used in a tax evasion scheme. Any such proposals would need to be very carefully examined to ensure they would be effective, could not be easily circumvented, would not needlessly disrupt the affairs of law abiding taxpayers and would be proportionate in their effect on the financial sector when measured against the problem to be tackled.
A responsible Government would need to have as much information as possible by way of answer to these issues before it acted. That is why I have taken such an approach. Caution and care should not be confused with indifference or indolence in these matters. The Opposition seems to want to rush in with unspecified and unlimited powers. I have to take a more responsible approach which, in the end, will better secure the welfare of ordinary citizens of the State and its revenues.
There should be no doubt about the Government's determination to combat tax evasion and avoidance. The Finance Bill, 1998, contains a number of new provisions for this purpose and I made further announcements at the weekend clamping down on new avoidance schemes. I will not hesitate to take further action as the need arises, be it increasing the powers of the Revenue Commissioners or implementing other measures that are likely to be effective.
Does it strike the Minister as strange that so many Irish commercial banks have branches in the Isle of Man? Because of this product and its association with the Isle of Man, will the Minister examine the need for a wider investigation into other banks? The products were marketed as non-resident accounts but belonged to residents, in effect making them bogus. It was clear Revenue was going to clamp down on them and an alternative was, therefore, being sought.
I must rule the Deputy out of order as Deputy Deenihan's question was taken in priority time. Only Deputy Deenihan can ask——
Deputy Deenihan is unable to be here.
The Chair cannot vary the rule.
Will the Minister reply as I have asked the question?
It is not in order for the Deputy to pursue the issue. I call Question No. 25.
Is it out of order for me to reply to the Deputy?
It is. We are outside priority time.
This is invidious. If it is a photo finish——
The Chair does not make the rules. It is not a photo finish.
I could have asked the question.
The Deputy can raise the issue with the committee concerned with Dáil reform.
I must infer that the Minister is declining to answer very important questions regarding the Isle of Man——
I am not declining to answer. I asked the Ceann Comhairle if I could answer and he replied no. I would be delighted to engage the Deputy in debate on this matter.
People can draw their own conclusions. Within a split second we moved from priority time to ordinary time.
I asked the Ceann Comhairle if it was in order to reply and he said no.
Priority time suddenly ended.
That is not my fault.
It was a supplementary question. Priority time elapsed before the Deputy rose to speak.
That confirms my point.
I wanted to check if a change——
A Deputy may ask a supplementary question outside priority time.
That is not correct. The Deputy should examine Standing Orders. If the question commences in priority time, it remains in priority time.
The Minister gave a very padded answer which was one of concealment.
That is not accurate.
My ruling is in order and has been made on a number of occasions.
This is obfuscation.
I expect more from the Deputy. Such nonsense is untrue and unfounded. I was willing to answer the question. The Deputy should raise the issue on the Adjournment and I will answer his concerns.
