Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We need to bring an appeal and support the motion under discussion in order to defend the integrity of our national and sovereign tax system and to defend the integrity of our tax collection agency, the Revenue Commissioners, but also to defend our overall offering as a place for investment and for foreign direct investment. The presentation of the judgment by the Commission last week gave an indication that Ireland was a haven for brass-plate operations and that employment was not provided by the companies that trade here. However, that is so false that it needs to be challenged. To allow it to go unchallenged would do a great disservice to those working for those companies and to those who work in our Civil Service and public service attracting those companies - agencies such as IDA Ireland. It would also do a great disservice to the overall offering for foreign direct investment.

The story of Apple in Ireland reflects that of many companies. It came as a basic manufacturing operation in 1980 with 60 people and today employs nearly 6,000 people because it has evolved as a company, working particularly with the Irish education system with a series of research and development initiatives brought in by Ireland and copied by countries across the world as a way to allow our basic technology industries to evolve to manufacturing excellence for the 21st century.

This appeal will also defend the sovereignty of the Revenue Commissioners. Our Revenue Commissioners have given tax rulings based on Irish tax law. The implications of accepting the judgment without an appeal is to give the European Commission the right to overrule our sovereign Revenue Commissioners - to overrule our sovereign Irish tax law - and to allow the European Commission to use our tax law and our Revenue Commissioners as a Trojan horse in order to attract the offering we make to corporate Ireland.

No proof has been provided that this is specific state aid to Apple as opposed to any other company. The Commission would do well to look at the remarks of former European Commissioner for Competition, Neelie Kroes, in this context.

The presentation of the Commission's case, whether intentional or otherwise, gave a completely distorted picture of foreign direct investment in this country. Some 5,000 people work for Apple, with another 1,000 to be employed. They pay taxes, which pay for social services, health and infrastructure in this country. Some 180,000 people work for American-headquartered companies making foreign direct investment in this country. Across the length and breadth of the country, regions have been given access to employment that otherwise might not have had it. People have been given the opportunity to use their education to return to their home communities by companies that came to Ireland - not just to Ireland, but to Europe - in competition with countries from outside Europe. In the presentation of its case, the Commission gave recognition to the integrity of our offering, the complexity of our offering and the skills of the Irish workforce that make that offering and renew that offering on a day-to-day basis.

Apple came here manufacturing the old Apple Mac, and today it is doing cutting-edge stuff in Cork, similar to many other companies that came in the 1970s to do very basic operations but, because of a range of measures, are now doing something different.

An international effort is under way to address the tax-avoidance issues that have been highlighted over many years. It is being led by the OECD through the BEPS process. It is important to recognise that the OECD has commented that Ireland has stayed the course and is making the necessary modifications and adjustments. It is happy to state that Ireland is "a strong and exemplary case of adopting and adapting". Those are the words of the OECD, which is leading the effort on reform of tax avoidance. Reform on tax avoidance cannot be done by one small country. It needs to be done on an international basis, along with reform of the issues leading to it. The European Commission decision has undermined that international co-operation and will make it harder to get international agreement to close down the loopholes we have spoken about. The Commission must take responsibility for the damage it has done in that regard.

We had one canonisation over the weekend. It is extraordinary to see the powers of infallibility given to the European Commission over the past seven days by people who previously would have ignored it and maybe even burned it at the stake. We were often told that the European Commission would come in and erode our tax sovereignty, but when it does, it is cheered. We have been told the judgment should be published - yes, it should be. However, we have the principles of the judgment which are wrong to us but are being cheered by others.

We are being told that we should take the €13 billion and run, but we are not being told how much of that €13 billion will be acquired by Ireland and how much, in the view of the European Commission, we are supposed to collect on behalf of other countries, including the USA. The European Commission has decided that is our duty to be the revenue collector for other countries. It has invited other countries to come to the party, suggesting that Ireland can collect the money and other countries can put in a claim, with the Revenue Commissioners in Ireland to manage that. That is an extraordinary decision with extraordinary implications and we cannot allow it to go unchallenged.

Certainty for business is key to this appeal. However, certainty was absolutely missing in the Government's response to this decision last week.

It was extraordinary to hear the remarks of the Minister, Deputy Noonan, that he knew a week before the announcement that we were going to have a negative decision. It had been signalled in 2014 that this was going to be a negative decision. Many of the principles that apply were indicated in 2014. Last week's pathetic response from the Government has damaged even further our willingness and readiness to appeal this decision. There should have been communication within Government about this decision, but it is clear that this did not happen. The events of the 48 hours immediately after the decision was announced did nothing to enhance this country's reputation.

We have to support the appeal. We support the appeal on the basis of those who are working in companies across this country. We support the appeal on the basis of those who are in third level education in the hope of staying in this country and working in and even leading these companies, as many Irish people have done. We support the appeal on the basis that the journey to avoid tax avoidance is to be done on a cross-country basis and not by one country alone. We support the appeal on the basis that Ireland, as a sovereign nation, has rights over its tax laws and the integrity of its tax collection institutions.

See this speech in context