The Minister for Foreign Affairs has ruled out any move to harmonise EU tax rates, saying Ireland will oppose the idea - which requires unanimity - at this week's EU summit in Nice.
At a press briefing in Dublin yesterday Mr Cowen stopped short of explicitly threatening to veto any such proposal. But while he said he would not "go in to do business waving the veto," he added: "For cogent reasons of national interest we do not see this as an issue on which we can compromise at this time."
He accused some larger states that favoured tax harmonisation as being self-interested, high-tax regimes. "Some larger states with more regulated economies with higher taxes would like others to be more in line with them in order to deal with their own domestic difficulties."
Ireland was not alone in opposing the introduction of majority voting in taxation policy. "The United Kingdom, Sweden and Luxembourg are taking the same line," he said.
The vast amount of national expenditure was still the responsibility of national governments. "Populations hold national governments responsible. So if we are responsible then let's have responsibility," he said.
"We are not being negative. This is not a case of not being Europhile enough. But our tax model works for Ireland. It's flexible, it gets quick investment. We are not in the business of harmonising taxes upwards."
Referring to the steady decrease in Irish taxation rates in recent years, he said: "We ain't going back."
Mr Cowen said Ireland wanted to see a successful outcome of the Nice summit in advance of EU enlargement. Enlargement was both in Ireland's interests and in the interests of the applicant states.
For Ireland, it would provide a new market of 160 million people offering great possibilities. It was "very much in our interests to have a successful outcome," Mr Cowen said. "We want to have a deal."
In relation to the applicant states there was a need for progressive democratic forces in the accession states to see that the EU was committed to them.
He said Ireland would continue to resist suggestions that small states lose their automatic right to nominate a member of the EU Commission in an enlarged union. The applicant states expect to be allowed nominate a commissioner, he said, and that should be allowed.
"We should allow the position of one commissioner per state to prevail," he said, while agreeing to "reweight" votes at European Council level in favour of the larger states.
Once the present wave of applicants had joined, bringing the Union to 27 member-states, it could examine the issue again to see whether the large Commission was too cumbersome or not.
On the German desire for a further EU Inter-Governmental Conference to begin after Nice, he said he did not believe a specific timescale should be set. Member-states should consult with "the European citizenry" before deciding on more constitution building.
"We are not a federation of states, but we are something more than a group of states," he said. IGCs too often involved "a reiteration of national positions until we see who is going to give", he said, indicating that he did not see such a process as an adequate means of addressing the questions about Europe's future.
He suggested that informal talks begin over the next 12 months and that "mechanisms" be found to gauge European public opinion.