Written answers

Tuesday, 19 January 2010

Department of Finance

Foreign Conflicts

9:00 pm

Photo of Darragh O'BrienDarragh O'Brien (Dublin North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 260: To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 215 and 223 of 16 September 2009, the reason the €41 million of imports from Israel in 2008 did not qualify for preferential duty; if he will give assurances that the reason was not due to the fact the these imports were of produce from Israeli settlements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1162/10]

Photo of Brian Lenihan JnrBrian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy will be aware, in September 2009, in response to the parliamentary questions mentioned, the Tánaiste explained that it was not possible to state with any certainty the reasons a preferential duty was not claimed in respect of particular imports. Accordingly it is not possible to give the assurance that the Deputy seeks.

However, it may be helpful for the Deputy to note that, I have been advised by the Revenue Commissioners that apart from the possibility that the goods were the produce of non-qualifying settlements, there are a number of other reasons why preference might not be claimed. The goods may not qualify under the rules of origin in as much as that they may have been originally imported into Israel from another country or may have been manufactured in Israel using raw materials sourced in another country. It may also be the case that, in the case of particular imports, claiming preference would have no impact on the duty payable and the importers saw no necessity or commercial benefit in claiming preference to which they had a technical entitlement.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.