CCCTB back on the EU agenda this year: SBP

kerrynorth

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
1,525
The introduction of a common tax base for businesses in the European Union is likely to be proposed early this year when the new European Commission takes office.

High-level sources in Brussels say the common tax base is ‘‘virtually certain’’ to be put back on the agenda this year.
Threat to Irish policy as common tax base back on EU agenda | The Post
Correct me if I am wrong but were we not told as part of the "legally binding guarantees" that taxation was a purely member state competence and nothing at all to do with the Lisbon Treaty? Now I was not stupid enough to believe that this was nothing other than words to get them over our referendum but a lot of people were certainly taken in by the 'guarantees'.
 


CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
Shut up, KN... why do you hate freedom, you NAZI!
 

Wakeupcall

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
1,010
If this comes to pass, the EU is a JOKE. Liesbon duped us.

The people were made fools of once again. They deserve what they get.
 

kerrynorth

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
1,525
Shut up, KN... why do you hate freedom, you NAZI!
That's very 'unparliamentary language' you...you.......cornerboy! I am reporting you to Dave. :mad: ;)
 

johnfás

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,715
Correct me if I am wrong but were we not told as part of the "legally binding guarantees" that taxation was a purely member state competence and nothing at all to do with the Lisbon Treaty? Now I was not stupid enough to believe that this was nothing other than words to get them over our referendum but a lot of people were certainly taken in by the 'guarantees'.
It is purely a Member State competence, and you are also intelligent enough to know that. Your trolling on this issue undermines you as an otherwise impressive poster.

Ireland would have to support the move in order for it to be effective - hence, having a guarantee over a national policy. You seem to be purposely blurring the idea of something being put on the agenda and something being actually ratified.

It is rather funny that you ignored to quote one of the final paragraphs of the piece which you linked:

The introduction of a common tax base would require unanimous approval by member states. While Ireland and several other countries remain completely opposed, a smaller group of countries could proceed with such a plan under the enhanced co-operation procedures.
Hence, it cannot be done without Ireland's approval - the very definition of a guarantee.
 

YoungLiberal

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
2,048
Correct me if I am wrong but were we not told as part of the "legally binding guarantees" that taxation was a purely member state competence and nothing at all to do with the Lisbon Treaty? Now I was not stupid enough to believe that this was nothing other than words to get them over our referendum but a lot of people were certainly taken in by the 'guarantees'.
*sigh*

We had a veto before the Lisbon Treaty.

We still have a veto.

They can put it on the agenda all they like, unless our Government agrees to it, it ain't happening.
 

terence

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
619
I always thought that changes in our corporation taxes are going to be the wakeup call for the Irish and hopefully they will realise that they were lied to.....but that requires an interest in whats going on hmmmmm!!
Can we see if the posters here who pushed for a yes can worm their way with words on this...such as these little gems, a vote yes was not yes to jobs but yes to less unemployment!!! vote yes will give us a strong standing in european affairs and will make it more democratic but when Mc Greevey made his remark about Sarkozy, yessers here were quick to say that of course we could not expect to be equal players with Germany....

Really curious to what responses they will give to this...
 

kerrynorth

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
1,525
*sigh*

We had a veto before the Lisbon Treaty.

We still have a veto.

They can put it on the agenda all they like, unless our Government agrees to it, it ain't happening.
It all depends on how the relevant article is interpreted. It could mean as pointed out in the referendum debate that the national veto on this can be effectively side stepped.
 

terence

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
619
oh young liberal
sigh .... I would hold your tongue and let this one play out...
 

YoungLiberal

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
2,048
It all depends on how the relevant article is interpreted. It could mean as pointed out in the referendum debate that the national veto on this can be effectively side stepped.
The veto can't be sidestepped. You're talking rubbish.

I love the way people say things like "It all depends on how the relevant article is interpreted", as if there's no possible way of knowing. What do you think is going to happen? Ireland (and the United Kingdom and a few others) will veto it, and the EU will just tell them to feck off or something?
 
D

Deleted member 17573

It all depends on how the relevant article is interpreted. It could mean as pointed out in the referendum debate that the national veto on this can be effectively side stepped.
How ? - since unanimous approval is required:confused:
 

johnfás

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,715
How ? - since unanimous approval is required:confused:
He is suggesting by way of enhanced cooperation. The EU provides that a minimum of 9 States may embark independently on a course of action between themselves, which does not include the other members of the union. It has existed since 1999 - when Ireland ratified it through the eighteenth amendment to our constitution - it has never been used, and certainly won't be achieved on a common taxation strategy. Even if it did, it would put pressure on Ireland to join, naturally if alot of other Member States did, but Ireland would still retain a veto over any EU taxation policy and thus would not have to engage in the enhanced cooperation procedure (which won't happen anyway) at any stage unless they decide they want to.

It is that simple and Lisbon has nothing to do with it.

Kerrynorth is just sadly diminishing other intelligent contributions he makes to the site by obvious trolling.
 
D

Deleted member 17573

He is suggesting by way of enhanced cooperation. The EU provides that a minimum of 9 States may embark independently on a course of action between themselves, which does not include the other members of the union. It has existed since 1999 - when Ireland ratified it through the eighteenth amendment to our constitution - it has never been used, and certainly won't be achieved on a common taxation strategy. Even if it did, it would put pressure on Ireland to join, naturally if alot of other Member States did, but Ireland would still retain a veto over any EU taxation policy and thus would not have to engage in the enhanced cooperation procedure (which won't happen anyway) at any stage unless they decide they want to.

It is that simple and Lisbon has nothing to do with it.

Kerrynorth is just sadly diminishing other intelligent contributions he makes to the site by obvious trolling.
Thanks - useful post;)
 

kerrynorth

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
1,525
He is suggesting by way of enhanced cooperation. The EU provides that a minimum of 9 States may embark independently on a course of action between themselves, which does not include the other members of the union. It has existed since 1999 - when Ireland ratified it through the eighteenth amendment to our constitution - it has never been used, and certainly won't be achieved on a common taxation strategy. Even if it did, it would put pressure on Ireland to join, naturally if alot of other Member States did, but Ireland would still retain a veto over any EU taxation policy and thus would not have to engage in the enhanced cooperation procedure (which won't happen anyway) at any stage unless they decide they want to.

It is that simple and Lisbon has nothing to do with it.

Kerrynorth is just sadly diminishing other intelligent contributions he makes to the site by obvious trolling.
Answer me this then. Why has this matter raised its head again after the coming into force of Lisbon if as outlined by every politician who advocated a Yes vote that no CCCTB proposal would be considered by Ireland? Why are there moves to get this 'on the agenda' again if the European institutions really believed Ireland would defeat all such proposals with a veto?
 

johnfás

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,715
Answer me this then. Why has this matter raised its head again after the coming into force of Lisbon if as outlined by every politician who advocated a Yes vote that no CCCTB would be considered by Ireland? Why are there moves to get this 'on the agenda' again if the European institutions really believed Ireland would defeat all such proposas with a veto?
Indeed, considered by Ireland.

It is quite simple really kerrynorth - you see there are some Member States who want to harmonise the tax base. They wanted to do so before Lisbon, they want to do it now Lisbon is effective and they will want to do so even after the next Treaty. There are another group of Member States who do not wish to harmonise the tax base. The Treaty maintains that for the EU to move on taxation policy, there must be unanimity. Therefore, Ireland has a veto over such a move. Until Ireland assents to such a move, there will not be a unified tax base across the European Union. They are the facts of the matter - it does nothing to change the intentions of other Member States.

Ireland is also not the only State who would oppose a common tax base. Even if they were, they still retain the veto. Perhaps you are suggesting that Ireland does not have the political will to withstand a push to move towards a common tax base, particularly if some States move independently through enhanced cooperation - but that is an entirely different matter. Ireland retains a veto, that is a fact, that is a legal certainty and Lisbon does not change that fact. It is as simple as that, and I suspect you are intelligent enough to realise that. So why pretend you are not? You are mixing the legal fact that Ireland has an absolute veto over these matters with a political opinion that they will not exercise it and treating those two imposters the same. As I said, it really does diminish your posts, which on the whole I thoroughly enjoy.

If Ireland wishes to exercise its veto, it can. Nobody can change that. Whether it wishes to is a different matter. That of course only proves the nature of the guarantees - that Ireland will not assent to such a move unless they decide they will be. In this instance, of course, no guarantee was actually necessary as there was never any EU competence to move in this direction without Irish assent, and I have always maintained that.
 

SilverSpurs

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
5,525
The last paragraph of the article clearly states that an inner core could establish the CCCTB by enhanced cooperation, which is exactly what the no side were on about. Declan Ganleys demand of a corporation tax protocol before ireland signs up to any treaty is vindicated.
 

johnfás

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,715
The last paragraph of the article clearly states that an inner core could establish the CCCTB by enhanced cooperation, which is exactly what the no side were on about. Declan Ganleys demand of a corporation tax protocol before ireland signs up to any treaty is vindicated.
You're talking utter nonsense - even if Ireland had rejected the Lisbon Treaty, it would be possible for certain Member States to establish their own common taxation base, applicable to those States only, through the Enhanced Cooperation Procedure. The Procedure was established in the Treaty of Amsterdam (effective 1 May 1999) and has thus existed for a decade. Lisbon made no difference to that fact, except making Enhanced Cooperation even more difficult to implement by raising the threshold of States (from 8 to 9) who must assent to such Cooperation in order for it to fall within the ambit of the Treaty.

Had Ireland rejected Lisbon, it would have made no difference to the ability of other Member States to establish a CCCTB between themselves. In fact, it would have been even easier to do so than it is post Lisbon.
 

Edo

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
3,040
dum de dum de dum

Well it was never off the agenda - Im quite sure this and many other items will be put on the EU agenda this year...........some will be passed.......some will be considerably watered down .....some will be put on the back burner for further discussion , others will be put back on the shelf and others will be discarded............such as happens year in and year out in the EU.

That said - given our considerably weakened international profile - we are effectively bankrupt with a letter of credit from the ECB all that is between us and Iceland.............Im not surprised that this proposal is seen by some here with a degree of trepidation - given that our entire economic policy with regard to FDI in recent years has been the propping up of the idea of Ireland as the Tax dodgers capital of Europe - you can do all our business elsewhere, employ most of your workforce elsewhere ,do your research and development elsewhere,buy your raw materials and sell your finished goods elsewhere , and then launder your profits thru Ireland Inc. where the regulator is always asleep, no white collar crime is ever punished and where the victorian era legal system is so totally in favour of the propertied and moneyed and creaks so badly it will never catch up with you in the end anyway.

The only companies that really benefit from this are the those with a skeleton "HQ" here and are mostly based in the IFSC and on plaques outside legal firms offices - funny how we claim them as our own and fight for their right to dodge tax outside their home countries and main markets, yet the minute they seriously f**k up (ie the 2 trillion in debt owed by the inhabitants of the IFSC ) we'll throw them back into the arms of their mother countries in a heartbeat - some chancers we are alright.

In a way - the introduction of the above would be the kick up the arse this country and economy needs - ie we would actually have to start seriously producing and exporting real products and services on a level playing field as regards taxation with the rest of the EU - and sadly that is the reason that our Government will oppose it tooth and nail, along with Luxemburg, the Baltic states and the Camerons' Britain - it is, for the forseeable future, a total non runner as regards being rolled out as an EU wide measure.

That said - there is every chance that will go ahead among certain central European states bilaterally thru enhanced co-operation - which predates Lisbon ( Lisbon has nothing to do with CCCTB at all - but why let the facts get in the way of a good rant eh!) - that will throw up some interesting dilemmas for us in the years ahead if it goes ahead thru Enh. Co-op - in ways that will be totally unforeseen at this moment in time - and there will be f.all we will be able to do about it as we wont be at that particular table thru our own choice- but then again thats what our euro-sceptic community want here isn't it?
 
Last edited:

Schuhart

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
4,831
Two thoughts.

Firstly, can pro CCCTB states now make a mutual agreement that effective stops Ireland from robbing their tax? What I mean is could Germany and like-minded countries use this as a mechanism to hit German companies so that routing their profits through Ireland brought no gain.

Secondly, given that we're financially dependent on Europe again are we in any position to obstruct such changes? Would opposition to the CCCTB be quickly followed by the ECB inviting us in to discuss our national overdraft?
 

johnfás

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,715
Secondly, given that we're financially dependent on Europe again are we in any position to obstruct such changes? Would opposition to the CCCTB be quickly followed by the ECB inviting us in to discuss our national overdraft?
But that is a political matter. There is a difference. Ireland still retains a veto and could tell them to get lost.

Any creditor of the Irish State could call in the Irish Government and make a demand over national policy, that does not change the legal fact that Ireland could decline their approach and accept the consequences of such a decline. For instance, our largest creditor could tell us that we have to rid our schools of religious education or they will not lend to us. That does not change our legal ability to decline their suggestion. It would however presumably mean that we would end up alot poorer, if in response they said they would not lend to us.

People need to distinguish the legal fact of our veto from a political opinion that we might be persuaded not to use it. We might be persuaded to do or not do anything, by any body or State. So the matter is really rather moot vis-a-vis attempting to construct an argument that we do not have a veto, when quite plainly we do.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top