Results 1,701-1,720 of 5,388 for speaker:John Deasy
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: The Chairman outlined the profile of the people who were Ansbacher account holders. Of the 20 people who availed of the tax amnesty and who were Ansbacher account holders, can she tell me what was their profile?
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: That is not possible, no?
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: Is that a reason-----
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: Okay.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: The Chairman knows the profile of the overall group of Ansbacher account holders but she does not know the profile.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: That is fair enough and I totally appreciate that. However, I must clear up something in this regard. The inference is that of those 20 people who availed of that tax amnesty in 1993, there was political pressure or a political motive behind the drafting of the 1993 legislation. My question is whether Revenue ever expressed a concern related to that.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: I am not talking about 1993. I am talking about ten tears later as Revenue was investigating this matter.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: This is clear. It is important this is said.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: That is fair enough.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: A lot of money was raised but the argument is that a lot more should have been raised because it was only a 15% tax. That is a view expressed by the Chairman's organisation at the time.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: That is fair enough.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: I have a couple of quick questions. I refer to the two reports under discussion today and acknowledge the Chairman does not have them to hand. Can she tell me whether they identified new cases?
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: That is important and let me ask the Chairman a different question. Did that new information or those new documents cause Revenue either to bring a case to a conclusion or to reopen a case?
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: I think that is it but if I may comment, I believe the first question I asked is very important and the response that was given is critical to this entire episode and that is that if Revenue actually have settled, for arguments sake, with individuals who have been named in a particular dossier, the authorised officer would not know about it. The authorised officer would not have any details...
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: I return to the reason we are here, that is, the accusation that Revenue did not investigate this matter properly. I would like Ms Feehily to provide information on the special projects team that was appointed to investigate the Ansbacher accounts, the number of people who were involved and the expertise they possessed.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: Ms Feehily referred to the ten-year rule being a serious impediment. Were there other impediments? The legislation underpinning the 1993 tax amnesty was introduced. Did the then board of Revenue or any senior officials give an official opinion to the Department of Finance with regard to this amnesty? Some people, including a number of academics, remain of the opinion that the tax amnesty...
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: It is fair to say Revenue does not like amnesties at all.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: It particularly did not like the one to which I refer.
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: Specifically, what were the impediments involved?
- Public Accounts Committee: Investigations by Revenue into Authorised Officers Report (4 Dec 2014)
John Deasy: I welcome the witnesses. The authorised officer in this case would have been a source of information for Revenue and would have assisted Revenue's investigations as a matter of course. If Revenue, as an organisation, settled with somebody, would he have known that?