Taxpayer was helped to open 166 accounts

Efforts by a Revenue inspector to prosecute Bank of Ireland officials for helping a single taxpayer to open 166 bank accounts were revealed at the DIRT inquiry public hearing.

Mr Donal Buckley, an inspector of taxes, gave details of how officials in the Tipperary branch of Bank of Ireland presented a taxpayer and his wife with 200 forms.

"The taxpayer spent, I think, an evening signing all these forms, blank forms, and the officials arranged for the opening of the accounts right throughout the country." The taxes related mainly to income tax and the settlement figure was £125,000.

Mr Buckley, who works in the prosecution branch, said he sought authority to prosecute the officials in 1984, before the introduction of DIRT. The chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, however, "took the view that it was a case he did not wish to go to the DPP". He felt there were difficulties on the "evidential side".

The committee was also told that the Revenue Commissioners did not apply the law fairly. Mr Paddy Donnelly, another inspector of taxes, said they were disgusted but nothing concrete was ever done.

Both officials volunteered evidence to the committee after it placed advertisements in national newspapers.

Mr Buckley said that when he tried to prosecute the officials the Revenue had no definitive prosecution programme. There was a culture of "settlement, not prosecution", he said. Mr Buckley agreed that the taxpayer with the 166 accounts got away "scotfree", assisted by the bank.

The Revenue's solicitor at the time, he said, described the case as very serious. The solicitor said that the assistance of the Garda should at least be requested and they might obtain evidence against one or all officials.

Mr Buckley told Mr Pat Rabbitte that he had no authority to refer the case to the Garda. "It would have to go up the chain of command," he said.

He told the inquiry that between 1983 and 1993 just three applications were made to the High Court to gain access to bank accounts. The first failed. "That of itself had the effect that people were not inclined to seek to use that power," he said.

Mr Donnelly agreed with the committee chairman, Mr Jim Mitchell, that "compliant taxpayers were let down badly by the failure to apply the law fairly".

Referring to the Revenue's internal memo, SIM 263, which prevented examination of declarations of non-resident accounts, Mr Donnelly said that they found the instruction frustrating. They were trying to do their job fairly and "a large section of tax evasion is cut off to you".

He told Mr Sean Doherty that there was no intimidation or threats if they tried to push something. Mr Doherty asked: "And what did you do then? You just did nothing beyond . . ."

To which Mr Donnelly replied: "We did our work, Deputy, with respect." He added that they tried to do as well as they could and "bore certain things in mind". They could not complain because of the Official Secrets Act.

Asked if he thought anything less of his superior officers because they did nothing about these issues, he agreed he presumed they were "wiser".

Mr Donnelly said the seeking to inspect declarations was "clearly off limits. No blame should be laid at the feet of any who had worked in it for not using this power of inspection."