Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I move amendment No. 104:

In page 18, before Schedule 1, to insert the following new section:

37.—(1) The Revenue Commissioners shall be independent in the performance of their functions under, or for the purposes of, a relevant enactment.

(2) Neither section 9(3) of the Act of 1924 nor Article 9 of the Revenue Commissioners Order 1923 (S.I. No. 2 of 1923) shall apply to the Revenue Commissioners in the performance by them of their functions under, or for the purposes of, a relevant enactment.

(3) In this section—

"relevant enactment" means—

(a) the Capital Acquisitions Tax Consolidation Act 2003 or any statute amending, or extending the application of, that Act,

(b) the Capital Gains Tax Acts,

(c) the Customs Acts or any instrument relating to customs made under statute,

(d) the Tax Acts,

(e) Part 18A, 18B, 18C, or 18D of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997,

(f) any statute relating to the duties of excise or the management of those duties,

(g) the Stamp Duties Consolidation Act 1999 or any statute amending, or extending the application of, that Act,

(h) the Value-Added Tax Consolidation Act 2010 or any statute amending, or extending the application of, that Act,

(i) any instrument made under any of the foregoing statutes, or

(j) any statutory instrument relating to any tax, duty, charge or levy that is placed under the care and management of the Revenue Commissioners;

"statutory instrument" has the same meaning as it has in the Interpretation Act 2005.".

This is the second of the two amendments that we transposed into the Bill today. We had a one hour debate on this today and we indicated in some detail that the amendment provides that Revenue shall be independent in the performance of its functions. It arises from the Moriarty tribunal and gives what is custom and practice, as Deputy Fleming rightly acknowledged, a statutory basis henceforth.

See this speech in context