Ireland to bankers: -More money for us. -Fuck you.

[Phantasee]

Ireland proposes 90% bank bonus tax

Dublin— Reuters
Published Thursday, Dec. 09, 2010 2:34PM EST
Last updated Thursday, Dec. 09, 2010 2:46PM EST

Irish Finance Minister Brian Lenihan said on Thursday he would impose a 90 per cent tax on bankers’ bonuses, in a move to try to silence critics who have said the banking sector drove Ireland into the ground.

“As far as the future is concerned I do propose to introduce the amendment to the finance bill to put this matter beyond any doubt and provide a high rate, a 90 per cent rate of charge on any ... bankers’ bonuses,” Mr. Lenihan told local radio.

Mr. Lenihan was referring to a bill that is the fourth in the series of a vote on the budget, which is expected to be ruled on in parliament early next year.

The Irish Independent reported on Thursday that Allied Irish Bank would pay out €40-million in bonuses to its executives.

Local media said that would not be subject to Mr. Lenihan’s proposed charge since the bonuses were for work done in 2008. Once the state’s largest listed lender, Allied Irish is facing a majority state ownership due to additional capital requirements.

The opposition centre-right Fine Gael party, which is likely to lead the next coalition government after an election next year, said a tax should apply to the Allied Irish bonus.

“We want them taxed at 99 per cent because we believe it’s immoral to use taxpayers’ money that was used to bail out the banks to pay bonuses,” Fine Gael deputy leader James Reilly told Irish television.

“Let me make this clear, they’re entitled to be paid it, we’re entitled to tax it,” he said.

The former chief executive of Irish Nationwide Building Society, Michael Fingleton retired a year ago with a controversial €1-million bonus, and former executives at collapsed Anglo Irish Bank have become hate figures in the media.

Ireland passed the second in a series of votes on the budget on Thursday. Once all the resolutions underpinning the budget have passed early next year, unpopular Prime Minister Brian Cowen is expected to call an election that he is widely expected to lose.

Opposition parties have harshly criticized the government for mismanaging the economy. Both Fine Gael and Labour want investors who lent money to Irish banks to share in the costs of the bailout instead of foisting all the burden on taxpayers.

Ireland’s central bank told lenders earlier this month to overhaul pay practices and link bonuses to sound risk management or face fines and disqualification for individual executives.

“Let me make this clear, they’re entitled to be paid it, we’re entitled to tax it,” he said.

[Lord MJ]

“Let me make this clear, they’re entitled to be paid it, we’re entitled to tax it,” he said.

Imagine an American congressman, or senator saying this. He would be crucified.

Goes to show the difference of American political temperament vs other western nations.

[weemadando]

I doubt this will make a shits worth of difference. These people have made their livings by hiding money (or lack thereof) fairly efficiently. They'll find a loophole in no time.

[Chris OFarrell]

Yup.

They'll sit there, grumble quietly so they don't look TOO quiet, but otherwise wait for the legislation to be passed, and THEN they'll happily exploit the couple of loopholes they saw in it while it was being written, but kept their mouths shut about in unabashed glee.

[KlavoHunter]

Hey, while Ireland is at it, would they maybe also like to amend whatever loophole that allows for the "Double Irish" tax dodge that Google and others are abusing? That'd be nice too.

[Zed]

Hey, while Ireland is at it, would they maybe also like to amend whatever loophole that allows for the "Double Irish" tax dodge that Google and others are abusing? That'd be nice too.

The Irish economy is in a bad shape. If they close that loophole, a lot of businesses will lose their reason for being in Ireland. It would be a bad move on the Irish' part.

[Norade]

I think all Western nations should close loopholes like that so companies can choose between paying honest taxes and moving everything to the third world or China. Then if they try to move tax them for 90% on the way out after passing a new law. Problem solved.

[Teebs]

I think all Western nations should close loopholes like that so companies can choose between paying honest taxes and moving everything to the third world or China. Then if they try to move tax them for 90% on the way out after passing a new law. Problem solved.

Well you end up with a prisoner's dilemma situation. Sure if everyone sticks to it it's great, but one country defecting gets very big benefits from doing so.

[Norade]

I think all Western nations should close loopholes like that so companies can choose between paying honest taxes and moving everything to the third world or China. Then if they try to move tax them for 90% on the way out after passing a new law. Problem solved.

Well you end up with a prisoner's dilemma situation. Sure if everyone sticks to it it's great, but one country defecting gets very big benefits from doing so.

You still nail them for 90% of everything and make their factories public sector with the funds taken, it's win win as long as you write the law tight enough.

[Teebs]

You still nail them for 90% of everything and make their factories public sector with the funds taken, it's win win as long as you write the law tight enough.

Sorry didn't see what you wrote about the 90%. Good luck with that. There'd be debate and such before a law like that was passed and you can be that every company capable of doing so would leave as soon as it became a viable prospect.

[Norade]

You still nail them for 90% of everything and make their factories public sector with the funds taken, it's win win as long as you write the law tight enough.

Sorry didn't see what you wrote about the 90%. Good luck with that. There'd be debate and such before a law like that was passed and you can be that every company capable of doing so would leave as soon as it became a viable prospect.

Yeah, it'd be stupidly tough to enact, but if you could ram it through fast enough or find a way to make it retroactive with another law then it would be impressive.

In all not something that ever will happen, but it would fix a few things.

[Mayabird]

It's still just a proposal. It may not pass. Don't get too excited.
[line 2]

[Teebs]

Yeah, it'd be stupidly tough to enact, but if you could ram it through fast enough or find a way to make it retroactive with another law then it would be impressive.

In all not something that ever will happen, but it would fix a few things.

There's a good reason why constitutions generally prohibit retroactive laws.

[Norade]

Yeah, it'd be stupidly tough to enact, but if you could ram it through fast enough or find a way to make it retroactive with another law then it would be impressive.

In all not something that ever will happen, but it would fix a few things.

There's a good reason why constitutions generally prohibit retroactive laws.

I was more thinking of a law that states that any corporation or citizen deemed to be fleeing in light of new legislation be bound by it.

[Uraniun235]

I think all Western nations should close loopholes like that so companies can choose between paying honest taxes and moving everything to the third world or China. Then if they try to move tax them for 90% on the way out after passing a new law. Problem solved.

Well you end up with a prisoner's dilemma situation. Sure if everyone sticks to it it's great, but one country defecting gets very big benefits from doing so.

No, the real problem is if a significant proportion of nations bail out. If it's only one then the rest can just slap tariffs on all commerce to and from that country.

[ShadowDragon8685]

I think all Western nations should close loopholes like that so companies can choose between paying honest taxes and moving everything to the third world or China. Then if they try to move tax them for 90% on the way out after passing a new law. Problem solved.

I've always liked the idea of doing something like this, but the problem is that, as has been mentioned, the companies would jump ship at the first sign of trouble, most likely to set up shop in the Cayman Islands or somewhere.

And I don't think it's possible to nail a company for fleeing before a law is enacted, and the idea of setting a precedent for a law under debate being enforced as though it were already law is not only dangerously close to ex post facto (would it be ex pre facto?), but if I were a company and the country I were in passed that law, I'd scarper immediately before they started debating laws like that.

Not to mention the fact that it lets you effectively make something into law simply by introducing it into the legislature even if it has no hope in hell of passing. It's a happy thought when you envision ridiculous sums of money being ganked right the hell out of bankers and distributed to the people, not so much when you're imagining something like minors in the care of homosexual couples or single parents being ganked right the hell out of their homes.

For something like this to take place would require nothing less than sci-fi/fantasy total mind control of every first-world legislature in the world, at the same time or very nearly at the same time (like, within a week for all of them.) And for that matter, I'm pretty sure that a law passed under influence of mental domination is worth about as much as a law passed under the barrel of a gun - IE, nothing.


Nice in theory, but it'll never happen.

[Stargate Nerd]

weren't democrats proposing something similar back in 08/09 after the bailouts?