Pat Casey (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. This is about the principle of the VAT refund scheme, not whether the threshold is set at €175, €75 or €50. It is about a scheme that has operated successfully for 35 years, including last year. It engages with over 3.2 million visitors. What have they done wrong to be so disenfranchised? Visitors have availed of this scheme for 30 years and now it is being pulled away from them. Why? We are being told it is because of Brexit.

I did not fully understand this and I was in communication with the Minister of State on it over the last two days until I got clarification that the measure related to single purchases in a single individual retail transaction. Equally, I was not aware of how this would impact on the cross-Border situation. The Minister of State has clarified that it has no impact in relation to Northern Ireland. That makes me more determined to get my amendment through because it now has no impact on traffic between the South and the North. Anyone who wants to avail of this VAT scheme has to get on a plane or a boat to come to this country. I am disappointed because the message I am getting from the Minister of State is that there is absolutely no room to move on this. We must look at this and move on it. The hardest thing to do in politics is reverse a decision. If we bring in this measure, it will be almost impossible to reverse it.

I ask the Minister of State to discuss a few proposals with the Minister to see if the Seanad, which is united on this issue, can be facilitated.We are unanimously agreed on this proposal or on a variation of these amendments.

I shall go back to the core of why I put in the figure of €1. I do not want to disenfranchise the small retail shop which is in every one of our villages and which would be disenfranchised by that threshold of €75. What I am proposing encompasses everybody, with nobody being disadvantaged. I am aware that the Minister of State has given examples of potential abuse of the system, which I believe is a stretch to be quite honest. The scheme has been in place for 35 years. Americans who have bought T-shirts and going around wearing them. Do not tell me it is going to be any different when a UK visitor comes over and wears one. In all honesty, we see them wearing their peaked caps and walking along with shillelaghs. They are all using them but nobody is claiming them at the airport and telling them they will not get their VAT back. That is the practicality of it. We have to be practical about these things because we are talking about people's livelihoods.

The Minister of State is trying to reverse my proposal in the context of the market and of looking at this as an opportunity. Clearly, Revenue looks at this as an exposure. I do not believe it is. It is one of the greatest opportunities where we can get an advantage over our neighbour to try to restore something back to this industry.

I should have admitted to the House that part of my hotel has a small craft shop attached. This is why I have an understanding of how important this scheme is to small craft shops such as those that sell trinkets. I refer to the small craft shop that sells the locally produced stuff. This is about the man that is down there banging out pieces of silver and bringing them up to the craft shops to sell. If we take this facility away from that sector we are actually taking away support for those artisan producers. We need to be very careful about this.

Like Senator Buttimer, I must ask why we are doing this? I do not understand. No reason is being given as to why we must introduce this measure. As Senator Chambers stated, if one were to reverse the logic of it, we would allow it to run for a year and then carry out a review with regard to it remaining the same and what impact that has had in one year. I ask the Minister of State to reverse this and to not go through with this process.

I say again that this is the very same as the corporation tax is to this country. That is how important it is. We have seen a whole economy develop in Ireland around the VAT refund. The biggest player and the biggest mover is probably the Blarney Woollen Mills, which would have started in the scheme back in the 1970s. I remember people on the coach tours coming into my hotel and saying "We were down in Blarney Woollen Mills last night". This scheme sustained many jobs in the State, including in the manufacture of the goods, which are now being exported back out again. We are putting all of this at risk, and for what? I do not know what the risk is. Perhaps the Minister of State can come back in on where the actual risk is to this country with regard to revenues if the scheme is not brought in. What is it doing to the 3.3 million visitors who have availed of this scheme over the past 35 years and which will no longer be available to them?

I will have to come back in again because I may have missed a few things. The Northern Ireland aspect is important. I am more resolute now than ever because I did not fully understand what the impact might be. The Minister of State has said that it will have no impact. I am now more resolute to keep pushing with this. Can the Minister of State understand from where we are coming? It is about the principle. It is about a promotion this State has availed of for the past 35 years to give it that advantage over our competition. We have used it exceptionally well.

The Minister of State referred to some of the other detail. Yes, retailers can give the VAT back at source of purchase, and they do this when they are exporting the goods on behalf of the customer. This is happening at the moment. Any of the more professional retailers out there who offer a mail order service give that VAT back at source. They have responsibility for ensuring that the goods are exported. It is happening now and I do not want to see that being used as an excuse. The Minister of State has given reasons as to why this proposal should not be brought in and I must say that many of them are spurious. I do not know why the Government is so adamant that this be brought in. I just do not understand the logic.

We need to give this whole industry the break it needs. Give it the year to try to recover. Most of these are small retail craft shops that never opened their doors this year and that did not earn one cent this year. Give them back that hope and the opportunity that this scheme of tax-free shopping that we have promoted for the past 35 years will remain, and not that it would be tax-free shopping only if a person spends €75 in the shop. Put it back there. There should be tax-free shopping for anybody from outside the EU. Let us get back to that simple message. I plead with the Minister of State to go back to the Minister and make contact with him about this. The officials are also here.

The House is united on this issue. The more we debate it, the more people understand it. I hope that some of the smaller retail shops, who have no idea on it, are listening in and understand the impact it will have on them. As I have said, it is not about the Blarney Woollen Mills, Avoca Handweavers or the Kilkenny Shop. Anybody going into those shops will spend €75. This is about the small, independent retail shop which is in every one of our communities and which will be disenfranchised by this process. Why? The Minister of State has still not told us why. What will be the impact of this on revenues? What will be the financial impact on the country? If we approach it right, it could be a win for the State. We should not to see it in the negative.