Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I have proposed a minimum effective corporation tax rate many times. The recent publication by the OECD that recommended a minimum effective tax rate in parallel to the BEPS process is a warning note to the Government to the effect that this particular regime will not last forever. Assuming that Ireland will continue to be an attractive destination in the EU post Brexit, the Minister will have a problem on his hands. If we have significant transfers of financial companies from the City of London to Ireland, I assume that they will be accompanied by significant transfers of intellectual property rights, which were the basis of Deputy Boyd Barrett's contribution. Those rights are moving from certain jurisdictions to Ireland, but not just because of taxes. We are probably a more attractive destination for a variety of reasons, including our location and the fact that there are many people in Ireland or who are prepared to come to work in Ireland who have the skills that the companies require. However, it is foolish in the extreme to allow very profitable companies to pay reduced rates of taxation. A minimum rate could be identified.

The Minister spoke about the consequences for the midlands of the recent decisions on decarbonisation and proposed an oversight and commentary role for the Committee on Budgetary Oversight. One way of addressing the issue would be to make more detailed information available on the figures behind the figures. The Department should be able to provide that fairly easily. Perhaps it could be provided via the work of the officials who are working with the committee. We could then have a discussion and see whether there is a pathway through this.

Via President Macron and others in Europe, we are still facing the likelihood of digital taxation. It is not a perfect mechanism of tax, but many countries will be frustrated with the approaches taken by a number of states, including Ireland, where their nationals are buying significant amounts of services or products that are effectively taxed at close to zero, leaving no flow of money to national exchequers. That is profoundly unfair and the Minister would be well advised to reconsider it. If the Committee on Budgetary Oversight were to be an acceptable mechanism to him, that work could be done through it.

I doubt that there are many in this country who want to sell Ireland as an international tax haven. We want to sell Ireland as a location for international investment and employment. I imagine that there is mostly agreement on that in the House. Given the country's focus on education, we are well placed to take advantage of that, but we must be prepared to address the tax issue. When I was in government, we went into the BEPS process in great detail. The latest iteration of that is the OECD's proposal to move towards a minimum effective tax rate. The alternative is a digital tax. Maybe the Minister has undertaken studies on the likely impact of digital taxes. I have asked him detailed finance questions on the increasing amounts that have been claimed back by countries like Italy. Having introduced their own taxation measures, they are claiming back payments that Ireland will consequently find are due to them. All of this could be the subject of detailed reports. Since I regularly get answers on this matter from the Department of Finance and the Revenue Commissioners, the data are available even if they are not complete.

We have discussed how the Minister is locked into the problem of the banks' enormous losses forward, the basis for which I am unaware. Is there a country that allows this kind of continuous losses forward over a very long period? We are in year 11 since the bank crash. Those losses started to be built up from 2007. We are talking about 12 year old losses and banks that in some cases have profits in the realm of €500 million to more than €1 billion. It is silly that they can continue doing this. The most valuable aspect of the banks is possibly these losses forward. We are in a situation where there are all sorts of demand on the Exchequer, ordinary workers have not got any tax relief even though incomes for many will rise by 3% per year and people in receipt of social welfare have got no increases. It seems profoundly unjust in terms of the principle of taxation that very profitable organisations should continue to get major tax breaks while ordinary workers, people on social welfare and pensioners get little or nothing out of the budget.

In the case of this amendment, if the Minister is prepared to put forward a format for reporting and discussion which meets his requirements, that would be a positive development.

See this speech in context