THE REVENUE is “not Nama” and is not interested in taking ownership of properties in lieu of cash payments, a tax investigator has told a court in Tipperary.
The comments came during a criminal case against a businessman who owes the Revenue more than €737,000 in tax, interest and penalties going back to 2001 and who has a two-year suspended prison sentence hanging over him, which runs out next January.
Tadhg Feeney, Jerpoint West, Thomastown, Co Kilkenny, pleaded guilty in 2009 to a number of tax-related offences and agreed last April at Kilkenny Circuit Court to make stage payments to meet his bill.
Judge Olive Buttimer warned him yesterday at Clonmel Circuit Court that he was facing a remand in custody if he did not come up with documentation sought by Revenue officials.
Revenue investigator Jack Hunt said part of the agreement made with Mr Feeney was that he would supply bank statements, mortgage statements and independent valuations of his properties, but none of these had been forthcoming.
“We’re dealing with a person who evaded tax for a long period, owes us a substantial amount of money and appears reluctant to engage with us fully,” he told Judge Olive Buttimer.
“We haven’t got the documentation we need. We want to be able to follow a money trail. We cannot follow a money trail because we haven’t the bank statements.”
The Revenue investigation of Mr Feeney goes back to 2001, Mr Hunt added, but Mr Feeney kept buying properties, which he never sold, after that year.
When Mr Feeney was originally prosecuted in 2009, he owed more than €1 million but had since reduced that to €750,000. He paid €12,900 before last April’s court appearance.
He owned at least 12 properties in Ireland and three in Spain but had been unable to sell any of them, the court was told.
Cross-examining Mr Hunt, Jack Hickey, defending, said his client was offering a number of properties to the Revenue.
“We’re not Nama,” Mr Hunt replied. “We’re not taking over properties. We have enough problems collecting money from taxpayers without setting up an auctioneering business and selling properties.”
It was put to Mr Hunt that Mr Feeney had not been able to sell his properties.
“Nobody in their right mind could deny that there’s a serious problem with the property market out there,” he replied. “There are such things as distressed property sales.”
Mr Hickey asked him if Revenue wanted Mr Feeney in prison.
“I want the court to take cognisance of the fact that there was €750,000 owed to the taxpayer,” Mr Hunt said, adding that Mr Feeney “hasn’t even had the good grace” to contact Revenue officials to say he could not afford to get his properties valued.
Judge Buttimer adjourned the case until Friday to allow Mr Feeney to come up with the necessary documentation, but she warned that her patience was “wearing thin”.
“I am quite prepared to remand him in custody to get those replies,” she said. “We’re talking about a very short timescale, otherwise he’s gone.”