Catherine Martin (Dublin Rathdown, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for the amendments. As I understand it, the purpose of the amendment is, first, to allow coimisiún na meán to identify and designate providers of what are referred to as sound streaming media and music sharing platform services; second, to provide for coimisiún na meán to impose a levy of 20% on the revenues of those providers earned in the State; and third, for the proceeds of the levy to be granted to the Arts Council for the purposes of making schemes to support the production of Irish music.

As the committee knows, as Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, I am firmly committed to supporting Irish art and artists, including musicians, across all practices. That is why I brought forward the basic income for the arts pilot scheme, which will provide €325 per week to support 2,000 artists, including 584 musicians over three years, and allocated an additional €2 million to the sound and vision scheme to support the live music-related programming this year. I understand the intention of the amendment is to raise further funds to support the Irish artists. I also understand the concerns that have been raised by musicians and artists regarding their remuneration for content consumed through music streaming services. This is a complex area and, in the first instance, I would emphasise that copyright law is a matter for Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

The committee will understand why I cannot accept this amendment. It represents a major policy departure requiring extensive analysis and consideration, with a number of complex legal and policy questions that need to be addressed. I would have a number of specific concerns regarding the amendment being proposed here. First, I note there is no explicit legal basis in EU law for such as levy. As Deputies are aware, the revised audiovisual media services directive applies to audiovisual broadcasters, video on demand services and video sharing platform services. The provisions in Article 13(2) of the directive, which provide the legal basis for the content production levy contained in this Bill, are directed at audiovisual broadcasters and video on demand services. In particular, the innovation of Article 13(2) of the directive is explicitly to permit the levying of video on demand services targeting audiences in the State. Second, it is unclear whether net revenue is intended to be analogous to taxable profit under the tax code or refers to post-tax revenue. In either case, what is being proposed appears to be similar to the current corporation tax, albeit that it seeks to tax revenue that is earned by a service. I would note, in that context, that the rate proposed is considerably higher than the current rate of corporation tax. It would be a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Finance, to consider a levy on net revenue in the first instance. Finally, the proposal would appear to target only those sound streaming services that are under the jurisdiction of the State, which I take to mean are established here. Accordingly, the levy would not appear to apply to the major services located outside the State. There is a risk then that those services currently established here would simply seek to relocate to another member state to avoid the levy.