Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

If I do not cover all of the Senator's points, perhaps she will remind me straight away. Reference was made to a possible influence on the drafting of the original legislation. I would say the need for this Bill goes back to 2015. Every year there has been progress on it. Many people were very much aware of this issue over the past five years. It has not come as a surprise, this year or last year, or even the year before that. It has been around for quite a period of time.In the interests of supporting the industry, having new business opportunities in the financial services sector in Ireland, additional investment into Ireland and job creation potential in Ireland, it was decided to proceed with this legislation. Ireland does not want other countries, which are moving a bit more swiftly with their legislation, having products available that people are seeking to invest in but Ireland not having the adequate legislation in place. That is why we drafted this legislation over a five-year period.

To start with, the financial services industry was asked and every investment limited partnership, ILP, will be regulated by the Central Bank. If we have confidence in the Central Bank, we have to be happy that it will do that job, and that is why it was involved in the legislation in that it will be the regulator.

The Revenue Commissioners were extensively involved in this, ensuring that the issues to which the Senator referred were adequately dealt with, which is why we have greater transparency in relation to same. People have to show their passports or prove they are the beneficial owner, which is an improvement on the original legislation. That was not in the original iteration. The Revenue Commissioners are satisfied with the current regime in relation to the taxation of the profits of ILPs. The Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation was heavily involved because it is part of business promotion. This would have been cleared at EU and IMF levels because such legislation now requires clearance at EU and IMF levels. Therefore, there has been quite an extensive amount of discussion on this legislation over the five-year period.

On the base erosion and profit shifting guidelines, one of the most critical ones that we have already implemented is action 13, that is, out of a total of 15. It concerns country-by-country reporting. That is really what people want to see where businesses are operating at an EU level above a certain threshold of turnover, that is, that there is country-by-country reporting. We will continue to implement some of the other base erosion and profit sharing actions in good faith, notwithstanding that the process is not yet complete, and nobody can give a date on which that will happen. People will have to accept that it is not appropriate to put this legislation on hold pending negotiations at OECD level, when nobody can put a date on when it might be.

The corporation tax legislation currently in place is very strong and robust and fully caters for this. We discussed this on Second Stage in the Seanad where this legislation was initiated. I provided answers on taxation in terms of ensuring there was full taxation of profits that arise as a result of this legislation.

The roadmap for corporation tax, which was published two years ago, is due to be updated in the near future. It is not specific to this legislation at all; it is much broader than this. Whatever that roadmap might say on ILPs or might not say, because there might not be anything to report, I do not think it would be appropriate to hold up the establishment of these new business opportunities for Ireland to increase employment and revenue into the State, and investment through these funds, pending matters outside our control.

I always understood there was a First Stage, a Second Stage, a Committee Stage, a Report Stage and a Final Stage to legislation. I am not aware of any in-between Stage, for example, a Committee plus Stage, where something can be taken after Committee Stage for pre-legislative scrutiny, which is essentially being requested here. I have provided the reason that it did not happen initially and did not happen on this occasion either. The committees were not in place and quite recently the Business Committee specifically waived the right to pre-legislative scrutiny before this legislation came before either of the Houses of the Oireachtas. That was done on 3 September 2020 by the Business Committee.

The issue of pre-legislative scrutiny has been discussed at length. Everybody agreed that it was not necessary on this occasion. We are going through the normal legislative process, following the roadmap that we go through in the Oireachtas, and that roadmap can be very extensive and detailed. I am not aware of how I or the House has any authority to change the roadmap, and introduce a Committee plus Stage before Report Stage. I am not in a position, nor do I think anyone is, to give that commitment. The legislative process requires a Committee Stage followed by a Report Stage. I am not in a position to give a commitment that I can alter the process by which legislation is put through the House.