Aideen Hayden (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I will not reiterate many of the points made by other contributors, but I want to focus on some things that seem to be coming from this exchange. The current appeals process, for whatever reason, is cumbersome and does not seem to be capable of delivering decisions within a reasonable period. The proposed legislation will effectively disenfranchise people from a particular right they currently have to appeal to the Circuit Court for a full re-hearing.

To what extent could many of the difficulties with the delays in the system be dealt with by putting relevant time limits into the existing legislation? There is no prohibition on that. I am thinking of planning law, for example, and other quasi-judicial functions operated by other bodies where there are appeals to the Circuit Court. If time limits are an issue and if the capacity of the system to process correctly and deliver timely decisions is at issue, I am not necessarily convinced that removing somebody's legal rights to a particular avenue, namely access to the Circuit Court, is the way to go.

It is not as though many people are using this access. When I first heard the officials' statements, I had the impression that access to the Circuit Court for re-hearings was being used by hundreds of people as a way to avoid paying up. However, their response to Deputy Pearse Doherty suggests that 14 people used that avenue, which is hardly a very significant number of people. Have the officials thoroughly considered putting additional measures into the existing legislation, in other words, time limits whereby decisions could be reached in a timely manner because it is not just in the interests of Revenue, but is in the interests of people who are challenging Revenue to ensure that time limits are within legislation and are robust?

Would the officials accept that people are afraid of the Revenue Commissioners because it is certainly my clear view that they are? I certainly accept the concern that has been voiced by Deputy O'Donnell. It is my experience, having worked as a solicitor, that people are terrified of the Revenue Commissioners.

The notion of an appeal requiring people to go public on their tax affairs would do what Revenue is trying to achieve, which is exact greater compliance, but for all the wrong reasons and from all the wrong taxpayers. The small taxpayer who does not have the resources to go to the High Court on a point of law and who lives in a small community where the people most interested in their tax affairs are from the local newspaper or radio station would not use an appeals system under which their tax affairs would be brought into the public domain. The Irish Tax Institute requested that cases in which smaller amounts are in dispute, say of less than €50,000, should be exempt. Some Revenue legislation has too much of a one-size-fits-all approach and it is like taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Why has the Department ruled out a more user-friendly system for those with smaller issues with Revenue?

Mr. Tobin and Mr. Smyth said that holding appeals in public as opposed toin camera, as is the case currently, would give people more information about the issues in respect of which a taxpayer could make an appeal. There is a role for the Revenue in this regard to ensure whatever means is available, including the Internet and liaising with tax practitioners, is used to make sure people know the grounds on which successful tax appeals can be made. Mr. Smyth suggested his organisation is not doing that.

Why are no registered precedents from the Appeal Commissioners published? Surely the place to start if Revenue wants to improve compliance and give the public information about its processes is to ensure there is a register of precedents, with the names of individuals redacted, which makes clear the grounds for making decisions.

Can Revenue deal with delays by amending existing legislation to ensure timelines are complied with? Mr. Smyth is correct that compliance will improve because people will not appeal. The bottom line is they are afraid of Revenue. The organisation should examine its own practices. The improvements Mr. Smyth says changing the system will bring about will make small taxpayers, particularly in rural areas, more uncomfortable. The improvements could be brought about through a more robust public information campaign without destroying the current in camerascenario. Unfortunately, there is a perception that if people's names appear in connection with the Revenue Commissioners at all, it is because they are not being compliant. The organisation will have a difficult job to get over that hurdle with ordinary taxpayers who are not into it for millions of euro and who would not use the High Court or the European Court of Justice on a point of law.