Brief History of Withholding Tax Case

Let's begin in the middle. The scene is Mount Juliet Hotel "I'm sorry" said the receptionist "there's nothing we can do" Shock. Six weeks before our October 1994 A.G.M. in Mount Juliet the booking was cancelled. Insistent probing disclosed the fact that the A.G.P. had been described as a "disreputable" group by persons whose identity we have been unable to establish. The hotel however welcomed us when they discovered that the Irish Pharmaceutical Union, the Dental Union, the Veterinary Union and the I.H.C.A. were attending the presentation of our withholding tax case.

That meeting convinced the major organisation that our case was exceptionally good, in fact, almost certain to succeed. There general councils pledged financial support. The I.C.G.P. later accepted also the soundness of the A.G.P. case against the tax. It could not under it's rules offer finance but it did offer support. This turned out to be disappointingly faint.

Enter the I.M.O. It informed the inter-professional group. The I.P.G. comprised the four bodies mentioned above and about ten other professional groups) that our case was weak and not worthy of support and that the I.M.O. had a better case. A further meeting of the I.P.G. was held two weeks later in November 1994 at the I.M.Os. insistence to hear the I.M.Os. case. The I.M.O. failed to attend that meeting.

In 1995 the I.M.O. campaign against our case continued. A series of meetings across the country called by the I.M.O. on another topic was used by them to rubbish the A.G.P. case. They not only did not know what our case was but they failed to respond to our correspondence. The meetings unsurprisingly failed to dispel the whiff of "disrepute" or danger supposedly attached to the A.G.P. Some complimentary remarks about the author of this piece were not heard at some of the meetings.

The Revenue Commissioners fought hard to scupper our case. Dr. O'Connell, whose name was known to the Revenue, had his tax returned and so his case fell. (There is rumour that cases taken by individual barristers were similarly defused). My name was kept secret until Judge Barr on the A.G.Ps. application in the High Court ordered a judicial review of "this iniquitous tax". Three days later the Revenue reimbursed my confiscated tax with interest. However their ploy did not work on this occasion as we already had the court order.

The case was taken and won emphatically by the A.G.P. with a special fund of £45,000. Our collection target had been £75,000 to protect me against loss. I waived my right to withdraw despite the shortfall as the case was so strong and despite the disappointment that only 17% of G.M.S. G.Ps. made a financial contribution.

Michael Daly, Thurles

©2009 All Rights Reserved.   Website Design: Ambit Ireland