Taxpayers who appeal Revenue decisions to be named

Brendan Burgess

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
58,346
I wasn't aware of this.

www.irishtimes.com

Tax professionals criticise ‘chilling’ proposal to name taxpayers who appeal Revenue bills

Irish Tax Institute expresses ‘profound concerns’ about fairness and privacy of proposed changes under planned legislation
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com

If there were some way of identifying vexatious or frivolous appeals, then maybe identify them after their appeal is dismissed.

But I could have a genuine disagreement with the tax inspector and it would be fair enough to appeal it.

If this goes through, then Tax Inspectors could raise unfair assessments on citizens knowing that they would not like their names and all their financial information published.
 
From Google AI:

Outcomes of Tax Appeals
The following data from the TAC annual reports illustrates the different outcomes for appeals:
  • Settlement: A significant portion of cases are resolved by agreement between the taxpayer and the Revenue Commissioners (Revenue) without the need for a full hearing. In 2023, 47% of closed appeals were settled. In 2022, settlements accounted for 62% of appeals closed.
  • Withdrawal: Many cases are withdrawn by the appellant, which can indicate a reluctance to pursue the case to a determination or a resolution outside the formal process. In 2023, 29% of cases were withdrawn.
  • Determination: Only a smaller percentage of appeals result in a formal, published determination by an Appeal Commissioner.
    • Of the determined cases, the success rate for taxpayers has fluctuated:
      • 2022: 18% in favour of the taxpayer.
      • 2021: 27% in favour of the taxpayer.
      • 2020: 26% (44 out of 171 total) in favour of the taxpayer.
 
So if the taxpayer has no case, he withdraws it.

If it's a grey area, they come to a settlement with Revenue - which is fair enough.

Of those who go to a hearing, 23% are successful. But despite that, they would be named!

It would be bad enough for someone who is successful to be identified and have their personal financial affairs made public.

But imagine the 77% who lose their cases! The media and social media would go mad. "Mean landlord tries to escape his tax liabilities slapped down by Appeals Court"
 
Brendan Burgess said:
I can't think of one
Click to expand...
There is none?
This has to be just to disensentify an appeal, and an abuse of a (very) dominant dominant position by Revenue.
If the law allows the right to appeal, a taxpayer should not face any peril or sanction, above and beyond the ruling they are appealing, for exercising their right to appeal. Unlike normal justice, tax affairs do not have to be aired or held in public. This is an attempt to ensure they are.
 
Only a few months ago reports were that Revenue was considering stopping of the reporting tax defaulters. Now they want to report the names of anyone who has an argument with them!
 
Towger said:
Revenue was considering stopping of the reporting tax defaulters.
Click to expand...

Have you a source for this?

If it's true, it's crazy.

There might be an argument for not naming and shaming tax defaulters as some seem to wear it as a badge of pride, but most would be scared of being named and shamed so I imagine it encourages compliance.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Have you a source for this?
Click to expand...
www.irishlegal.com

Revenue’s tax defaulter list in question after ECtHR ruling

Irish tax authorities may be forced to stop publishing a quarterly list of tax defaulters following a recent European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgment, according to reports. The government is examining the implications of the court's ruling in L.B. v Hungary, no. 36345/16 on 9 March 2023, in w
www.irishlegal.com www.irishlegal.com

Google gives a number of different sources from 2 years ago. Only an few months ago in my head!
 
I have no issues with tax defaulters being named. Those quarterly lists are usually people who have had a long drawn out process with revenue whether through “poor advice” evasion, or any other reason.

But I don’t agree with being named publicly for taking an appeal. Everyone has a right of appeal, some will win, some will loose but they should have the right to not be in the public eye when they go through the appeal.

This Article says influencers and only fans content creators who are young women worry about their name and address being published for being tax defaulters as they tend to work from home. I suppose the best advice I would give them is to pay up the tax as soon as revenue catch up with them and set up a small business to shield their name and address. You would think if they are savvy enough to be earning the €200K they would hire an accountant or tax advisor to ensure they are compliant.
 
How is that not a gdpr issue. I thought personal sensitive data is supposed to be kept confidential by the body who hold it. How can it be published for anyone to read it - those readers have no right to see an individuals tax affairs.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
If this goes through, then Tax Inspectors could raise unfair assessments on citizens knowing that they would not like their names and all their financial information published.
Click to expand...
Why would they do this? It would seem very risky behaviour for a civil servant to take. They'd have no way of knowing that the person isn't going to appeal, so they're risking having their assessment publicly excoriated. I'm assuming if the taxpayer gets named, so do the Revenue personnel involved. That'll focus their minds too, and I dare say plenty of Revenue staff might not be very keen on the idea for that reason!

The entire purpose of a tax inspector's role is to get the right tax, at the right time. The type of person who would be inclined to raise capricious assessments is going to do it either way so I'm not sure you make a solid argument against open justice on that ground...

If they were on commission, or otherwise incentivised to high-ball tax, you'd be making a valid point, for sure!
 
Luternau said:
Unlike normal justice, tax affairs do not have to be aired or held in public. This is an attempt to ensure they are.
Click to expand...
This is only the case in front of the Appeal Commissioners - if a TAC appeal determination is appealed onwards to the High Court on a point of law, it is heard and decided in public, like almost any other civil matter.

The distinction exists because the TAC is the first port of call in tax disputes, it gets its own treatment. In the interest of clarity, I'd point out that the legislation is actually drafted such that by default all appeals are to be held and determined publicly; however, currently the appellant has the right to elect for the matter to be dealt with in camera, which almost everyone does.

The fact that it's always been this way is not necessarily an automatic justification for maintaining the status quo.

I'm confidently asserting that there's plenty of people in the ~75% of appeals that Revenue win following a hearing (at no little expense to the State) that are what most people would consider tax cheats pure and simple; they chanced their arm in the first instance on their tax return, and they effectively get a free roll of the dice by chancing the appeal commissioners. I say free roll of the dice because they can enjoy anonymity and they also aren't exposed to having to pay Revenue's legal costs (a consequence that only kicks in once you're in front of the Courts).

Tax appeals are a form of litigation from the moment an appeal is lodged. Revenue are obligated to treat it accordingly and incur direct legal costs and the opportunity cost of staff time stuck dealing with the files for however long the process takes. (Actually, I'd love to know how much staff resource and legal costs Revenue incurs each year, on the very high percentage of cases that they ultimately succeed in by settlement, withdrawal and determination.)

On the other hand, a taxpayer can litigate their case at whatever cost they choose to (or can afford), from lay litigant up to the best representation money can buy.
 
Last edited:
@torblednam

Good to hear the other side of the argument.

I might be misrepresenting tax inspectors. But I assume in grey areas, they take the Revenue's side? And it's only grey areas which go to the Appeals.

I appreciate the point you are making about the costs to Revenue. But is the solution then not to make the appellant liable for the Revenue's costs of a failed appeal? Rather than naming and shaming them.
 
I had to appeal a hefty Revenue "bill" some years ago. Revenue didn't win the appeal. It is not an easy process for the victim where I felt obliged to hire a tax accountant and pay a "deposit" of quite a lot of money before the appeal was lodged by me. It was not an experience that I enjoyed and it took over three years from start to finish, if I can call it a finish. It was a worrying time for me even though I knew I owed nothing to Revenue. I don't fancy my name and address being broadcast like Revenue's quarterly newsflashes of tax defaulters. My experience was not an easy one and although I worked as a civil/public servant all my working life, I was very disappointed in the ways I was treated by Revenue.

Please note "fine" changed to "bill" some days later on the "suggestion" of @torbedlam below
 
Last edited:
Brendan Burgess said:
I am trying to think of some advantage of publishing the names and I can't think of one
Click to expand...
It seems excessive when it’s only one specific group who are singled out for that treatment.
It’s not clear why only tax cases have so much personal information published in an easy searchable database. Even serious criminals don’t have their home address published in an online register for anyone in the world to read. I’ve never heard of registers for other court cases eg lists of people with motoring offences, thieves, fraudsters, tv licences dodgers, killers etc. It’s strange that GDPR doesn’t limit Revenue from publishing explicit sensitive data about individuals.
 
Last edited:
Luternau said:
There is none?
This has to be just to disensentify an appeal, and an abuse of a (very) dominant dominant position by Revenue.
Click to expand...
exactly why isn't there the same puritanism or window twitching when it comes to welfare fraud, they are still able to enjoy privacy and anonymity ?
 
Leper said:
I had to appeal a hefty Revenue "fine" some years ago.
Click to expand...
Revenue don't impose fines, your leprousness.

There's surcharges, interest, penalties.

Only a surcharge would be appealable to the TAC. The others would be matters for the courts and you'd end up in the public domain anyway.

Which was it?
 
There has to be a responsibility on the State not to put a target on people’s backs by publishing names and personal details online. The tax defaulters list goes far beyond compliance and drifts into public shaming. In reality, particularly for younger women with an online presence, publishing names and addresses exposes them to unwanted attention, harassment, and obsessive behaviour. It is not credible to suggest that if someone is assaulted or harmed as a consequence, the response is simply “oh well, you should have paid your taxes then”. Tax enforcement should be proportionate and focused on collection, not public exposure that creates real personal safety risks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top