Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yesterday, there was a debacle in County Donegal when officials from Revenue and agents acting on its behalf sought to remove machinery from Highland Bakery, which is located on the outskirts of Letterkenny. The employees working there then barricaded themselves in and a stand-off ensued between Revenue officials and the staff there. The background to this matter is that like many good businesses, the owner has got into difficulties and owes money to Revenue. While he does not dispute this, the issue is how can a sustainable repayment plan be arrived at. At present, the owner, Kevin Bradley, is being asked to repay €20,000 per month, which is not sustainable. The question and dilemma for Revenue is there are 28 workers and 15 drivers involved, making 43 employees in total. If one multiplies that number by the €20,000 per year each it would cost the State, the final amount this would cost the State per year runs to hundreds of thousands of euro. I appeal to the Revenue Commissioners to engage immediately with the owner, who has assured Deputy Doherty and I that he wants to resolve this issue and maintain his business, in respect of which he has a full order book. Like many other businesses, while previously he was paid upon delivery it is often a month or longer now before he gets paid. As such, he has difficulties with cash flow.

I assure the Minister that the owner wants to repay what he owes but on a sustainable basis. I appreciate that Revenue has a job to do and that the taxes it collects are required to run our health and education services and so on. However, I appeal to the Minister and his officials to intervene to resolve this problem and, more important, to ensure jobs are saved in Donegal, where, as the Minister will be aware, there is a huge problem in terms of unemployment and emigration. The business concerned has been successful and can continue to be successful with some assistance from the Minister.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As stated by Deputy Mac Lochlainn, this issue relates to a company that has been trading in Donegal for well over a decade. I appreciate that Revenue is independent and has to a job to do, which it does well, in terms of the collection of outstanding tax liabilities. The problem is that the scope of Revenue is to collect as much tax as possible without factoring in the wider impact in this regard. For example, had workers not barricaded themselves into the factory yesterday and the sheriff had gained access with his low loaders and taken away machinery, all of them would have been heading to the social welfare office today, which would, as stated by Deputy Mac Lochlainn, cost the State, on average, €800,000 per annum or €20,000 per person, which is disproportionate to the tax liability of the individual concerned.

The individual concerned wants to pay his liability but to do so in a manner which allows him to sustain his business. While I accept that Revenue is independent, I ask that the Minister intervene in some way to resolve this issue, which does not only affect Highland Bakery. I was contacted this morning by a constituent who has been given seven days to pay half of his tax liability, which is impossible for him to do, or the sheriff will be called in, following which 14 people will lose their jobs. I was also contacted last week by another individual who, having been visited by the sheriff the day after he paid his liability, in respect of which I accept payment was late, must now pay sheriff's fees. I spoke in committee about a young girl who had set up her own business in which she employed another individual. She was visited by the sheriff in respect of a €2,000 tax liability and had to scrape and scrounge to get the money together to ensure her equipment was not repossessed but as a result of which she had to lay off her employee. There are 21,000 unemployed people in Donegal.

While I accept that Revenue has a job to do, putting these companies out of business will cost the State more money in the long term. Each of the companies concerned is willing to enter into a phased repayment arrangement with Revenue. I appreciate there are chancers who have money and assets who do not want to pay their taxes. However, I am assured that some of the individuals of whom I speak have already paid their bills but are being charged additional fees by sheriffs. While I accept that sheriffs have a job to do, their actions infringe on the mental health of individuals who are struggling and do not wish to put other people out of work.

There has been much talk about job creation. Some 42 jobs are at risk in Highland Bakery and 12 jobs are at risk in the other company, the details of which I can give to the Minister at a later stage if he so wishes. I ask the Minister to review the wider scope of Revenue and the impact of repossessions which automatically close companies. In terms of Highland Bakery, if this matter is not resolved 42 people will lose their jobs, which will have other spill over effects in terms of non-payment of bank and other liabilities and a loss of revenue to the State by way of payment of PAYE, PRSI, the universal social charge and so on.

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputies Mac Lochlainn and Doherty for raising this matter. I believe it would be entirely inappropriate for me to comment on any alleged or perceived dispute between Revenue and an individual taxpayer or business. For reasons of taxpayer confidentiality, Revenue cannot disclose details of or comment publicly on the specific affairs of any individual business or taxpayer, which is entirely appropriate. I also believe that intervention by me in a dispute between Revenue and a particular business or taxpayer would not be appropriate.

It is a long standing convention that the Minister for Finance does not intervene in matters of dispute between Revenue and an individual taxpayer. In that context, I remind the House of the provision at section 101 of the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 2011 enacted last year by the Oireachtas which provides for the independence of the Revenue Commissioners in the performance of its functions.

Revenue plays a critical role in securing and delivering a significant part of the financial resources required by Government to provide services and facilities for all our citizens. A delay in collection of the revenues due impacts on the level and timeliness of financial resources available to Government. It also facilitates those who withhold tax and PRSI payments and use those moneys to improve cash flow to gain an unfair competitive advantage over tax compliant competitors. The primary goal of the Revenue Commissioners is to ensure that all taxpayers and businesses meet their tax and customs obligations in a timely fashion. It expects that taxpayers and business organise their financial affairs to ensure that they pay their tax and PRSI debts on time. In this regard, Revenue promotes and supports voluntary compliance by facilitating taxpayers and businesses in meeting their obligations in as easy a way as possible through the provision of a quality customer service.

I am satisfied that Revenue approaches the task of securing the collection of the critical taxes and duties payable to the State in an efficient manner. Internationally, Ireland is among those countries that make it easiest for taxpayers to pay their taxes. Revenue is very conscious of the difficult economic and financial climate that prevails and of the challenges for business in being timely compliant. Since the start of the economic downturn, Revenue has responded by actively encouraging businesses experiencing particular payment difficulties to work proactively with them when such difficulties start to arise. This approach is designed to facilitate the identification and development of an agreed approach between Revenue and the businesses concerned to those difficulties so as to quickly restore voluntary timely compliance. Revenue has developed an administrative framework to manage such cases, and has published on its website comprehensive material and guidance for businesses experiencing tax payment difficulties. I am aware that tax practitioners and representative bodies have acknowledged Revenue's very positive efforts in this regard.

Revenue will endeavour to work with a viable business towards resolving the issues giving rise to default in making its tax payments. It has worked successfully with thousands of businesses over the past number of years in addressing such difficulties, thus saving further thousands of jobs that would otherwise have been lost. I am advised by Revenue that crucial to the success of its approach is meaningful, realistic and early engagement by the business or taxpayer concerned.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for his response. I accept that the Minister is unable to intervene for legal reasons. However, it is, as Deputy Doherty pointed out, critical in the case of Highland Bakery that Revenue look at the wider impact of an unsustainable repayment plan. The cost to the State, in terms of social welfare payments if the 42 employees lose their jobs, will be €20,000 per person or €800,000 per annum, which is multiples of the amount owed. Surely, it makes sense for Revenue to put in place a sustainable repayment plan.

The business owner was recently involved in an accident, which may have caused some difficulties in terms of communications. While I accept that Revenue must be independent of the political system, it is hoped it will listen to our views in terms of the economic environment and our belief that this matter can be resolved. It is hoped that following this unfortunate stand-off, which is not in anybody's interests, Revenue will engage with the business owner and agree on a sustainable repayment plan that is in everybody's interest.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will just add to that and reiterate that Revenue is very efficient. There have been weaknesses in the past but it does its job well. There is no doubt the sheriff could have got access to Highland Bakery yesterday. The low loaders and lorries were there and were taking away the machinery. Only the workers were left, who barricaded themselves in. If the sheriff gets access to that business, he will be able to recoup the money on behalf of Revenue.

The Minister, as Minister for Finance, this Parliament and this State will be down more money, as Deputy Mac Lochlainn acknowledged; some €800,000 for 42 employees. There is very little opportunity for any of those workers to find a job in County Donegal, which has 21,000 people unemployed. I realise Revenue is working with other businesses and that is fine, but there are four files on my table, as I explained to the Minister, on which they are not working. The people in question are willing to pay their liabilities but in a way that can sustain employment.

I know the Minister has limitations in this regard but I ask him to look at the role of Revenue, a role that might have been fit for purpose in better times. Perhaps it needs a direction or a change of legislation. At this time, however, when jobs are our number one priority, Revenue must take on board the impact of closing down a business. As the Minister remarked, it is not solely about recouping outstanding liabilities for the taxpayer. If there is a need for amendment in that regard, we would support it.

I know Revenue has to push the owners of companies such as this as far as it can but if it pushes them too far it will close down the company, there will be a loss of tax revenue and people will be unemployed.

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Usually the sheriff arrives only after many other approaches have been made by Revenue. It is usually a recourse of last resort. If I may suggest it, the Deputies are entitled under law to make representations to Revenue on behalf of a constituent. There is nothing improper in that as has been made clear on a number of occasions. The Deputies should probably talk in the first instance to the company's accountants so that they are not at cross purposes, proposing something different from what has been proposed. They will also need the written permission of the person they represent so that they do not breach the confidentiality Revenue needs to maintain with a taxpayer.

I am probably the last person in the House who can approach the Revenue because I have to maintain a very strict relationship and respect its independence. There is nothing improper, however, if the Deputies take up the cause and approach Revenue directly.