Mr. Niall Cody:

I think it has been acknowledged probably by everybody, including the Commission, that the creation and management of the intellectual property and the intellectual property rights developed in the US. I think that is a given. That is where the work was done - where the research and development is done. We had to look at what was in the Irish branch in Cork. The intellectual property is not created in Cork or in the branch in Cork. It is outside the branch and outside Ireland. The fundamental issue here is the interaction about residence rules.

In a way, this was not discussed hugely with the Commissioner and she did not make any real play about it. The heart of this is the mismatch between tax residency rules, in this case with Irish registered companies. This goes to the heart of the BEPS action plan. If this could be sorted by state aid, the whole issue around BEPS, the whole issue around CCCTB, would be very different. However, what we have is a mismatch. The issue around what is in the head office would not have been a matter for our officials in 1991 or 2007. From the point of view of the Commission, in a way, the 130 pages are the 130 pages for the prosecution. The legal case, which I cannot share with the committee, rebuts those points. Ultimately, it will be a matter for the court. As the Commissioner said the other day, ultimately this will be a matter of law.