The Institute has its say on the Finance (Tax Appeals and Fiscal Responsibility) Bill 2024

As previously reported in Tax News, the Department of Finance published its Revised General Scheme of Finance (Tax Appeals and Fiscal Responsibility) Bill 2024, which contained, among other things, proposals to substantially alter the adjudication process at the Tax Appeals Commission. As part of the pre-legislative scrutiny process of the Bill, the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation were inviting submissions from interested groups. On Friday, the Institute sent in our submission to inform the discussions. Our fundamental concern relates to the proposal that adjudication at the Tax Appeals Commission would be in private in exceptional circumstances only and that redaction of determinations would be at the discretion of the Appeals Commissioner. You can read our full submission here.

Our view is that appeals heard by the Tax Appeals Commission (TAC) can be substantially differentiated from those heard by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC):

• In Zalewski v Adjudication Officer and the Workplace Relations Commission, Ireland, and the Attorney General [2022] 1 IR 421 (“Zalewski”), the individual had no right to have a hearing before the WRC heard in public. It is already the case that a taxpayer can make an application to have an appeal before the TAC heard in public.
• Unlike the WRC, the TAC does not arbitrate between private parties (as was the case in Zalewski, which concerned the operation of the WRC). The role of the TAC is to consider and determine whether an assessment made by the Revenue Commissioners (an executive arm of the State), should be confirmed or varied.

Fundamental to the operation of the self-assessment tax compliance process is the principle of confidentiality of taxpayer data. The proposed amendments to the TAC procedures must be established in light of this fundamental and legislatively enshrined principle. This starting point therefore necessitates that the fundamental principle of public hearings must be limited for cases heard at the TAC.

We also note that the TAC, under its current procedural mandate, preserves a taxpayer’s right to privacy under Article 40.3.1 of the Constitution. To the extent that any amendment is made, it should ensure that a taxpayer’s right to privacy remains protected with an irrefutable right to request a private hearing and redaction of identifying information for all cases brought before the TAC.