The High Court ordered an Irish-based company to provide information sought by the Revenue Commissioners on behalf of tax authorities in France, Germany, the Republic of Korea and Iceland. The orders were made under section 902A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 after the court found the statutory prerequisites satisfied and considered the applications appropriate.
Mr Justice Richard Humphreys delivered the judgment on 22 June 2020 in four linked cases. The Revenue applications concerned information relevant to the financial affairs of groups of taxpayers in the four jurisdictions. The precise information sought was refined through later affidavits and oral evidence.
The judge accepted that the applications had an objective justification. He cited evidence in the French application indicating significant non-declaration of income by the taxpayers under inquiry. He also accepted the Revenue submission that a group request is not a fishing exercise solely because the individuals are not named or the group may be large.
The company’s evidence narrowed the information sought. For Germany, it proposed alternative wording, which the Revenue applicant confirmed the German authorities would accept. The applicant also confirmed a correction to the Korea schedule: the word “annual” had been used for a period that was not quite a calendar year. The court directed that the final orders incorporate these changes and other amendments set out in affidavits and oral evidence.
The company must furnish the information by 14 August 2020. The proceedings were held in camera to protect the integrity of the foreign tax investigations. The court allowed the company to refer to the existence of an order, but not its terms, when responding to queries from people or entities whose information was obtained, or from regulators or law enforcement authorities. The judgment said that this did not permit public statements.
The court adjourned costs to 3 July 2020 and said it would hear the parties on possible redactions to the judgment. It also recorded that a separate Australian application had been struck out by consent with no order.