Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This debate should be an opportunity for everyone in the House, regardless of political affiliations or philosophical differences, to put Ireland's long-term strategic and economic interests first. It should be an opportunity for us to state with a single voice that we reject the European Commission's ruling on Apple and its spurious claims that Ireland has done sweetheart anti-competitive deals with an individual company. We should be united in asserting our sovereign right to decide our own tax laws - a right acknowledged in the EU treaties - and stand up to this crude and baseless attempt by the Commission to use bogus state aid claims to direct our tax policies. Instead of arguing against the decision to appeal the ruling, we should be united in reminding the Commission that it once saw itself as the champion and defender of smaller EU member states but is now behaving as the protector of the bigger states, unfortunately.

We are absolutely right to appeal this wrong decision. Indeed, to do otherwise would damage us irreparably and would call into question many other tax judgments lawfully and rightfully made by the Irish tax authorities. No less an authority than the previous European Commissioner for Competition, Ms Neelie Kroes, has questioned the basis for the Commission's ruling on Apple. Writing in The Guardianlast Thursday Ms Kroes, who was very tough on stamping out anti-competitive practices in the EU during her time as a Commissioner, argued:

EU member states have a sovereign right to determine their own tax laws. State aid cannot be used to rewrite those rules. However, the current state aid investigation into tax rulings appear to do exactly that, by suggesting a radical new approach to so-called transfer-pricing rules that determine where profits shall be allocated.

She went further and specifically warned:

...you cannot change the rules of the game through ad hocstate aid enforcement, and then seek retroactive recovery for unpaid taxes. Doing so would be fundamentally unfair and would harm competition, growth and tax income in Europe. And it raises serious questions about legal certainty and the rule of law.

It is regrettable that some contributors to this debate fail to recognise the role that strong and successful FDI has played in providing good quality employment for so many of our people. There are almost 190,000 people directly employed by FDI companies across a range of sectors all over the country, with a further 200,000 employed indirectly. While not every town in the country benefits from FDI plants or sites, the basic fact remains that one in five of all jobs in our economy is directly or indirectly supported by inward investment. Are we to put that level of investment at risk so that some political points can be scored? Are those jobs, livelihoods and contributions to our communities really so unimportant to those Deputies who oppose appealing this wrong decision?

As others have stated repeatedly over the past few days, the central tenet and foundation of Irish corporate tax law is that those profits arising in Ireland are subject to Irish corporation tax. Conversely, the profits from technology, design and marketing generated outside Ireland cannot be charged with Irish tax under Irish tax law. This mismatch between the tax laws in Ireland and those in other countries is not something that should be laid at our feet, as the Commission has attempted to do. Ireland is not the reason that there has been no international agreement on a tax system suitable for the age of online sales and virtual stores. Not alone are our systems transparent and fair, as Deputy Michael McGrath pointed out earlier, we have been to the forefront in the OECD in working to sort out the mismatches in national taxation systems. Ireland must continue to work to progress international efforts to reduce and eliminate tax avoidance.

In appealing the Commission's decision we are asserting our sovereignty and independence in the face of the Commission's bluff and bluster as well as acting responsibly in safeguarding our economic future. Not to appeal this decision would be to sacrifice both for very short-term pickings, be they political or financial. Taxation is a national competency. The Government must send out a clear, strong and unambiguous message that this Commission decision will be vigorously contested. Our 12.5% corporate tax regime must be constantly reaffirmed as a cornerstone of our industrial policy.

See this speech in context