Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Let me go back to the Deputy’s earlier question on the €250,000. This relates to pension payments that have been made to bodies under the aegis of the Department of Finance as opposed to officials within it. The official pension figures are covered elsewhere. I can get more detail on the subhead for the Deputy if he wants. The figure refers to responsible agencies, and the Deputy knows which ones they are.

On the issue the Deputy raised regarding corporate tax policy, he was correct about the risk he described. We signed up to a global tax agreement and while there were always genuine issues regarding how the US would enter the pillar with regard to the reallocation of taxing rights, the Irish Government had the reasonable expectation at the time that the US would be part of the agreement on the rate. The US authorities have now made a statement that they are going to withdraw from this. I have two points to make. First, the US has indicated it is going to participate in the OECD. At the first meeting since the announcement was made, the US had a full delegation. It has indicated it wants to engage with other countries on this issue. I can only interpret that as a positive signal. At least it wants to engage.

On the direct question on the minimum effective tax directive, we negotiated and put in place the directive with the aim of delivering tax equity. I believed it created competitiveness issue but that we could manage it. For now, I want to determine whether we can find a way to keep the US inside the framework, at least in respect of the rate. That is the basis on which we are trying to engage with it. For me, it is too early at this point to say what changes we might need to make if this is not successful. I want to make the case to the committee – I am doing so elsewhere – that it is in our interests and those of the US to be part of a global tax agreement. I hope we can preserve what we have managed to negotiate.