6 years jail for garlic scam

Media999

MOSSAD wrote: »

This guy loves money, so hit him with fines, and audit him for the next 10 years.

Oh right. So all the rich people have to do now is say "we love money" and there let off with fines. Maybe fined 1 of there 10s of millions.

So many hypocrites on Boards these days. I suppose we let John Gilligan out and take a percentage of his millions aswell will we. Oh wait no. That wasnt socially acceptable garlic was it.

benway

BarackPyjama wrote: »

What with all the employment you provide and such. Good man yourself.

Let's get this straight. In our current model of social organisation, employers don't "provide" employment as a public service, they milk profits off the back of their employees' hard work. That's just how it is.

My employer needs my skills to run his business. This is why he pays me, and because he pays me I go to work.

The point is that they need to play by the rules, just like anyone else - they shouldn't be able to buy their way out when their misdeeds are exposed. Being a captain of industry doesn't provide a blank cheque to break the law when it suits.

celticcrash

Import a box of garlic, price 100 euro, pay tax of 230 tax on that box.
Who is robbing who?

BarackPyjama

benway wrote: »

Let's get this straight. In our current model of social organisation, employers don't "provide" employment as a public service, they milk profits off the back of their employees' hard work. That's just how it is.

Employers take massive risks setting up businesses. Most fail within the first few years. The self-employed don't have anywhere near the same entitlements and protections as those they employ. The rewards can certainly make the risks worthwhile but in most cases they don't.

benway wrote: »

My employer needs my skills to run his business.

Wrong. He needs someone with your skill set to work for him. If you don't do it, he'll find someone else who will. You're not the best at what you do either.

benway wrote: »

This is why he pays me, and because he pays me I go to work.

Indeed. You should be very happy that you have a job and that your employer set the business up so that you can go to work, get paid and earn a living. Many aren't so lucky.

benway wrote: »

The point is that they need to play by the rules, just like anyone else - they shouldn't be able to buy their way out when their misdeeds are exposed. Being a captain of industry doesn't provide a blank cheque to break the law when it suits.

I would agree with you to an extent but we don't live in a just world unfortunately. I'm a business owner myself and I'm struggling to make ends meet because of the cost of doing business in Ireland. We're providing employment, doing more for the country than you're doing by the way, and yet we've nearly went under time and time again. My employees all get paid on time but I've found myself unable to even afford food at times because of the struggle of setting up a business. We'd be a more comfortably viable business if we didn't have to pay shed loads of cash each year to the government to cover their inept 'running' of the country. So show a little respect. You're not entitled to a job and you should be f**king grateful to 'de biznez classes' for affording you one.

BarackPyjama

And by the way - employers do provide employment. What a stupid f**king thing to say.

benway

BarackPyjama wrote: »

And by the way - employers do provide employment. What a stupid f**king thing to say.

What, their aim is providing jobs for the great unwashed? Or are jobs a consequence of their striving for profits. Take off the blinkers, son.

BarackPyjama

benway wrote: »

What, their aim is providing jobs for the great unwashed? Or are jobs a consequence of their striving for profits.

Profit is the primary concern of a business. Of course it is. That doesn't mean that business is unethical - it's called 'economics'. It also doesn't change the fact that businesses provide employment.

Some businesses make obscene profits and underpay their staff. Some make modest profits and overpay their staff. In reality, most just chug along nicely. At least the ones that survive the first few years.

Entrepreneurship will be the lifeblood of this country's economic recovery after its destruction by the elite few sociopaths and corrupt government that have brought it to its knees. Down the road, probably quite far down the road in reality, you'll have that entrepreneurial spirit to thank. Although I'd imagine people like you probably won't bother you're so caught up in your self-entitlement.

rev1961

BarackPyjama wrote: »

Employers take massive risks setting up businesses. Most fail within the first few years. The self-employed don't have anywhere near the same entitlements and protections as those they employ. The rewards can certainly make the risks worthwhile but in most cases they don't.



Wrong. He needs someone with your skill set to work for him. If you don't do it, he'll find someone else who will. You're not the best at what you do either.



Indeed. You should be very happy that you have a job and that your employer set the business up so that you can go to work, get paid and earn a living. Many aren't so lucky.



I would agree with you to an extent but we don't live in a just world unfortunately. I'm a business owner myself and I'm struggling to make ends meet because of the cost of doing business in Ireland. We're providing employment, doing more for the country than you're doing by the way, and yet we've nearly went under time and time again. My employees all get paid on time but I've found myself unable to even afford food at times because of the struggle of setting up a business. We'd be a more comfortably viable business if we didn't have to pay shed loads of cash each year to the government to cover their inept 'running' of the country. So show a little respect. You're not entitled to a job and you should be f**king grateful to 'de biznez classes' for affording you one.

You are such an arrogant fool !! I don't partake in the Boards forums too often, but your attitude provoked such annoyance that I felt I had to comment.

You seem to think that because you run a business and give employment, you should be partially, if not totally exempt from the 'shed loads' of taxes. WHY ?? While conducting your business the state provides you with both direct and indirect facilities and resources to enable your business to maximise it's potential. The national infrastructure, the Gardai, the fire service, the council services(water, waste, etc) and most importantly, the educated employee. All these things do cost money. You are not the only one paying for all these. The PAYE employee is paying a hell of a lot more, proportional to their income.

Don't dare adopt the stance that employees should be grateful to the employer for given them jobs. Your comment 'You're not entitled to a job and you should be f**king grateful to 'de biznez classes' for affording you one', demonstrates your contempt for the employee. They are just a tool to earn you 'shed loads' of money and should be eternally grateful to the likes of you.

Your contributions to date have a distinct 'Begleyesque' smack to them, and if all employers adopted the same mentality, this country would not only be suffering an economic implosion but would also colapse in the area of social conscience, a far more serious blyth.

:mad:

BarackPyjama

rev1961 wrote: »

You seem to think that because you run a business and give employment, you should be partially, if not totally exempt from the 'shed loads' of taxes. WHY ??

Where did I say I should be exempt from taxes? My company pays all the taxes asked of it by the Revenue. I was just saying that I can understand why some businesses don't.

rev1961 wrote: »

While conducting your business the state provides you with both direct and indirect facilities and resources to enable your business to maximise it's potential. The national infrastructure, the Gardai, the fire service, the council services(water, waste, etc) and most importantly, the educated employee.

The state has provided me with absolutely f**k all since I went into business for myself. I've never availed of the Gardaí, fire or council services in a professional capacity. It's notoriously difficult to find skilled employees in my industry in this country. Most of the sheeple were chasing qualifications and degrees in more profitable industries during the boom and now most of my staff are from overseas as it was the only way I could find suitable talent. So basically what I'm saying is that you're wrong on every bloody level.

As for paying my own personal income taxes and what not and benefiting from the Gardaí, national infrastructure, etc. Yeah, I'm in the same boat as everyone else in that regard. Well, aside from the fact that I've been burgled twice in the last 12 months and the Gardaí have done sweet f**k all about it both times. Tax dollars well spent. :rolleyes:

rev1961 wrote: »

All these things do cost money. You are not the only one paying for all these. The PAYE employee is paying a hell of a lot more, proportional to their income.

Don't dare adopt the stance that employees should be grateful to the employer for given them jobs.

They should. They should be very, very grateful on the basis of the very real and precarious risks that many businesses take to get off the ground in the first place so that employment can be provided. On the flip side, employees should also have sufficient rights and entitlements and be respected by their employers. It's a two way street.

rev1961 wrote: »

Your comment 'You're not entitled to a job and you should be f**king grateful to 'de biznez classes' for affording you one', demonstrates your contempt for the employee.

My employees are treated exceptionally well. As I've said, I've gone without food to ensure they're paid on time and kept in employment. I don't know if that entitles me not to be labeled with the title 'arrogant fool' as you insinuated earlier. Maybe not. I just think you're wrong.

rev1961 wrote: »

Your contributions to date have a distinct 'Begleyesque' smack to them, and if all employers adopted the same mentality, this country would not only be suffering an economic implosion but would also colapse in the area of social conscience, a far more serious blyth.

Risk-taking entrepreneurs will save our economy. Not the government who have already destroyed it and not a workforce with a sense of entitlement because they went to UCD for a few years and who think the world owes them a living. So, as I say, show some respect.

Duggys Housemate

There is a remarkable amount of stupidity on this thread from the anti-bidness classes. There is, of course, business cronyism in this - and every - country.

An example of how business cronyism, and state corruption intermingle would be for instance ( to take an example pertinent to this thread)

1) A group of producers of something feel they can't compete with foreign producers.
2) Despite not producing anything of much consequence, or providing much jobs ( in which case protectionism may have merit); and despite the fact that most of the rest of the business classes do have to compete with imports with little or no customs duties attached, these politically connected producer classes bribe somebody ( effectively, its a bribe) at the European level, probably not a democratically elected politician either, but somebody, to put a 232% customs charge on their particular food stuff. This charge which is 2,500% higher than the 9% charged on similar food group.
3) We are talking here about garlic, could you tell?


This is corrupt mercantilism, cronyism and it is the corrupt links here we need to look into .Why is this food stuff being protected, why are some entrepreneurs - importers, who are reducing the price of food in general - in jail to protect others who cant compete in a free market?

The whole "morality police" thing here is rubbish. This is Ireland, acting like Russia, where businessmen who can control the State's laws use those laws to jail competitors.

benway

BarackPyjama wrote: »

Although I'd imagine people like you probably won't bother you're so caught up in your self-entitlement.

Let me understand this. For putting the view that company directors shouldn't get a free pass when caught out for massive fraud, that they should face prison like anyone else, I'm anti-oootraprenooorship? And it's me who's displaying the sense of entitlement here?

BarackPyjama

benway wrote: »

Let me understand this. For putting the view that company directors shouldn't get a free pass when caught out for massive fraud, that they should face prison like anyone else, I'm anti-oootraprenooorship? And it's me who's displaying the sense of entitlement here?

Well this is the issue. I don't consider not paying a 230% import tax brought about through political corruption to be massive fraud. You do. The government does too obviously. But I don't. In general I don't allow a government that has bankrupted and destroyed this country's economy through industrial scale corruption to dictate my sense of moral justice.

rev1961

BarackPyjama wrote: »

Where did I say I should be exempt from taxes? My company pays all the taxes asked of it by the Revenue. I was just saying that I can understand why some businesses don't.



The state has provided me with absolutely f**k all since I went into business for myself. I've never availed of the Gardaí, fire or council services in a professional capacity. It's notoriously difficult to find skilled employees in my industry in this country. Most of the sheeple were chasing qualifications and degrees in more profitable industries during the boom and now most of my staff are from overseas as it was the only way I could find suitable talent. So basically what I'm saying is that you're wrong on every bloody level.

As for paying my own personal income taxes and what not and benefiting from the Gardaí, national infrastructure, etc. Yeah, I'm in the same boat as everyone else in that regard. Well, aside from the fact that I've been burgled twice in the last 12 months and the Gardaí have done sweet f**k all about it both times. Tax dollars well spent. :rolleyes:



They should. They should be very, very grateful on the basis of the very real and precarious risks that many businesses take to get off the ground in the first place so that employment can be provided. On the flip side, employees should also have sufficient rights and entitlements and be respected by their employers. It's a two way street.



My employees are treated exceptionally well. As I've said, I've gone without food to ensure they're paid on time and kept in employment. I don't know if that entitles me not to be labeled with the title 'arrogant fool' as you insinuated earlier. Maybe not. I just think you're wrong.



Risk-taking entrepreneurs will save our economy. Not the government who have already destroyed it and not a workforce with a sense of entitlement because they went to UCD for a few years and who think the world owes them a living. So, as I say, show some respect.

I stand by what I said.

If you could step back and see the undercurrent of 'everyones to blame, but me' mentality that is evident in most your comments, you may realise that you and those like you, should also acknowledge accountability for the past and responsibility towards the future.

You seem to have a very biased and prejudiced opinion. Maybe you should give credit where real credit is due. Fair play to the Risk-taking entrepreneurs for their efforts, but they would not achieve anything without the skills and dedication of their workforce. There is a chicken and egg situation here, but you recognise only one.

Although this vein is an aside to the original post topic, it is very relevant to the overall issue; HONESTY. Begley's dishonesty; an honest admission to the value of our workforce; honest assessment of our situation.

BarackPyjama

rev1961 wrote: »

You seem to have a very biased and prejudiced opinion. Maybe you should give credit where real credit is due. Fair play to the Risk-taking entrepreneurs for their efforts, but they would not achieve anything without the skills and dedication of their workforce.

If you actually read what I've said, I've made it quite clear that both businesses and employers deserve their due respects, entitlements, etc. A 230% import tax on garlic negates this respect. It's utter corruption brought about by vested interests in supposedly 'free market' economies. It's not good for indigenous business and it's not good for consumers (e.g. tax paying employees). Only in a world gone mad could you call this guy a criminal.

rev1961 wrote: »

There is a chicken and egg situation here, but you recognise only one.

Wrong.

rev1961 wrote: »

Although this vein is an aside to the original post topic, it is very relevant to the overall issue; HONESTY. Begley's dishonesty; an honest admission to the value of our workforce; honest assessment of our situation.

I agree. Honesty is indeed an admirable quality. I think though that before the government asks businesses to be honest, they should lead by example themselves.

As an honest businessman working in a country run by criminals, I can tell you that it's a very, very tough slog. My life would be a lot easier if I was 'dishonest' and I can understand why people are.

Doc Ruby

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

This is corrupt mercantilism, cronyism and it is the corrupt links here we need to look into .Why is this food stuff being protected, why are some entrepreneurs - importers, who are reducing the price of food in general - in jail to protect others who cant compete in a free market?

What do you think European CAP supplements for farms are? Producers can't compete with countries like China where disposable people can be paid €10 a week and the currency is actively manipulated to make these cheap goods even cheaper.

And don't think the Chinese and other countries aren't doing the exact same thing, because they are.

The penalties for stiffing the taxman have always been harshly enforced, and for good reason.

Dudess

Media999 wrote: »

MOSSAD wrote: »

This guy loves money, so hit him with fines, and audit him for the next 10 years.

Oh right. So all the rich people have to do now is say "we love money" and there let off with fines. Maybe fined 1 of there 10s of millions.

So many hypocrites on Boards these days. I suppose we let John Gilligan out and take a percentage of his millions aswell will we. Oh wait no. That wasnt socially acceptable garlic was it.

You're not comparing like with like seeing as the two crimes are different, and drugs are illegal, unlike garlic.
Where's the hypocrisy you're talking about?

Thirdfox

Dudess wrote: »

You're not comparing like with like seeing as the two crimes are different, and drugs are illegal, unlike garlic.
Where's the hypocrisy you're talking about?

The two crimes are crimes...

Tax avoidance - encouraged and legal (that's why people pay large sums of money to tax advisors and solicitors to help them find loopholes/tax efficient processes).

Tax evasion - illegal - just like drug dealing, driving while drunk, creating a cartel.

I think what the person you were quoting meant was, if this person was a banker who got caught by the taxman for tax evasion, the majority of AH would be delighted. A stiff penalty for a murderer/rapist/child molestor would also be applauded on AH. But this person happened to be evading tax in a less "sinister" manner and so many people are ambivalent to baying for his blood.

Please remember this everyone - he only defrauded the State of 1.6 million euro (that we know of) because he got caught and there was overwhelming evidence against him. What if he wasn't caught years ago? Would the tax bill to the State be 3 million, 4 million, 5 million by now (and rising)?

And that's why we need to have a white collar crime system that has teeth. Fines of 5000 euro ain't gonna cut it on directors (whether they be directors of banks/agricultural businesses/etc.)

And that's why I'm happy that the system seems to have worked in this case.

To sum up a complex matter in a flippant phrase: You do the crime, you do the time.

Duggys Housemate

Thirdfox wrote: »

The two crimes are crimes...

Tax avoidance - encouraged and legal (that's why people pay large sums of money to tax advisors and solicitors to help them find loopholes/tax efficient processes).

Tax evasion - illegal - just like drug dealing, driving while drunk, creating a cartel.

I think what the person you were quoting meant was, if this person was a banker who got caught by the taxman for tax evasion, the majority of AH would be delighted. A stiff penalty for a murderer/rapist/child molestor would also be applauded on AH. But this person happened to be evading tax in a less "sinister" manner and so many people are ambivalent to baying for his blood.

Please remember this everyone - he only defrauded the State of 1.6 million euro (that we know of) because he got caught and there was overwhelming evidence against him. What if he wasn't caught years ago? Would the tax bill to the State be 3 million, 4 million, 5 million by now (and rising)?

And that's why we need to have a white collar crime system that has teeth. Fines of 5000 euro ain't gonna cut it on directors (whether they be directors of banks/agricultural businesses/etc.)

And that's why I'm happy that the system seems to have worked in this case.

To sum up a complex matter in a flippant phrase: You do the crime, you do the time.

Again, no sense of the actual morality of the crime. Or of Economics.

He "defrauded" the State of it's extortionate claim that certain foods be taxed at 232%, and others at 9%. If the State had applied that 232% customs charge to French wines, then everybody and his brother would be sipping french wines imported illegally.

The economic imbecility here is mesmerising. The point of a 232% tax is not to get the tax money, but to keep goods out of the country. If there was no way around this tax then the garlic would not have been imported, and the tax would not be owed.

But lets pretend that was not the case.Lets be economic imbeciles. Let's say that as many garlic bulbs would have been imported, and as many sold. So the government gets( would have got) it's £1.6M.

Now who is actually paying for the Government's £1.6M? Think about it. Then think about it again.

Thats right. You. The garlic eater. The food consumer. Its a zero sum game. You are worse off, the government is better off. It can pay higher pensions to 4 teachers. If you are in the private sector and you support this tax you are an idiot.

And if you think that the 232% is a decent tax, with no economic consequences then you should be sanguine with a VAT of 232% on all goods ( VAT or custom duties, or both for imports).

Think about how much money the Government would raise :rolleyes:

dvpower

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

If the State had applied that 232% customs charge to French wines, then everybody and his brother would be sipping french wines imported illegally.

The state doesn't set the rate - I think its an EU wide rate for garlic coming in from outside the EU, so the french wine example doesn't apply.

The people who really lose out because of this evasion are the European growers.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

And if you think that the 232% is a decent tax, with no economic consequences then you should be sanguine with a VAT of 232% on all goods ( VAT or custom duties, or both for imports).

Do you think we should unilaterally lower the rate for Chinese garlic with no quid pro quo?

Duggys Housemate

dvpower wrote: »

The state doesn't set the rate - I think its an EU wide rate for garlic coming in from outside the EU, so the french wine example doesn't apply.

The people who really lose out because of this evasion are the European growers.

Why? Why are we protecting European growers of Garlic, rather than European growers or onions, or apples, or makers of electronics - a 232% on iPads from China would see iPad factories start up in the West within a year? Where is the 232% on non-European software? That;d push up my wages for sure ( at the cost of your software).

Why are we protecting one set of private businesses at the cost of everybody else? Why is that a criminal matter?

I know it is a European decision, therefore the claim that "we" or the oireachtas decided it is moot; probably an unelected official in cahoots with Garlic producers in the Garlic loving land to our East.

Duggys Housemate

dvpower wrote: »

Do you think we should unilaterally lower the rate for Chinese garlic with no quid pro quo?

Thats a larger separate argument, but I bet the Chinese would compete anyway. The need for a 232% tax indicates the Chinese would win the market, if there was full multi-lateral free trade.

plasmaguy

Severe sentence but well done to the Revenue Commissioners none the less for catching up with him.

He tried to make a quick buck and was found out. I've no doubt he was competing against other more honest retailers, and was making massive profits while they struggled to get by.

I also hate when people who commit crimes look for sympathy afterwards or plead for clemency. It makes a mockery of the justice system.

If we don't punish significant tax evasion as was the case here, we'll end up like the Greeks.

wexie

plasmaguy wrote: »

It makes a mockery of the justice system.

It's not a justice system, it's a legal system.

If it was a justice system we wouldn't be having this discussion.

(but don't worry, it would appear lots of people make this mistake :rolleyes:)

Duggys Housemate

Actually I have changed my opinion on this. There should be a 232% charge on all items imported into Europe, including oil, I like expensive stuff. And a 100% tax on all income over €0.

Any tax evaders will go to jail for 16 years.

Not really, of course, but as wexie points out, this thought experiment may show the difference between Justice and law.

plasmaguy

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Why? Why are we protecting European growers of Garlic, rather than European growers or onions, or apples, or makers of electronics - a 232% on iPads from China would see iPad factories start up in the West within a year? Where is the 232% on non-European software? That;d push up my wages for sure ( at the cost of your software).

Why are we protecting one set of private businesses at the cost of everybody else? Why is that a criminal matter?

I know it is a European decision, therefore the claim that "we" or the oireachtas decided it is moot; probably an unelected official in cahoots with Garlic producers in the Garlic loving land to our East.

I'd imagine there is significant duty on lots of products from China, to protect European jobs and damn right too, otherwise eveyone in Europe would be unemployed or working on the same sh*t wages as the Chinese in sweat factories, trying to compete with them.

The Chinese are notorious for flooding markets such as the European market with cheap products which are often rip offs of more expensive European products.

It makes sense to protect Europe from Chinese flooding of the market with cheap products manufactured in sweat shops for pittance wages.

Free trade with China? No thank you.

dvpower

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Why? Why are we protecting European growers of Garlic, rather than European growers or onions, or apples, or makers of electronics - a 232% on iPads from China would see iPad factories start up in the West within a year? Where is the 232% on non-European software? That;d push up my wages for sure ( at the cost of your software).

We don't have a free trade agreement with China. Some goods carry high tariffs, some lower - that's all negotiated, and agreed, between the EU and China.
You can be quite sure that the Chinese in turn heavily restrict some of their markets to our goods.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Why are we protecting one set of private businesses at the cost of everybody else? Why is that a criminal matter?

I don't get the question. Why shouldn't it be a criminal matter? Is free trade some kind of basic human right?

BarackPyjama

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Not really, of course, but as wexie points out, this thought experiment may show the difference between Justice and law.

I think it just highlights that there are a lot of complete morons out there who'll tow the "it's the law" line completely irrespective whether the law is fair and just or not.

Duggys Housemate

plasmaguy wrote: »

I'd imagine there is significant duty on lots of products from China, to protect European jobs and damn right too, otherwise eveyone in Europe would be unemployed or working on the same sh*t wages as the Chinese in sweat factories, trying to compete with them.

The Chinese are notorious for flooding markets such as the European market with cheap products which are often rip offs of more expensive European products.

It makes sense to protect Europe from Chinese flooding of the market with cheap products manufactured in sweat shops for pittance wages.

Free trade with China? No thank you.

If you think that there is a 232% charge on anything else imported from China then you really don't know what is going on. Pretty much everything in the shops is produced by cheap products manufactured in sweat shops for pittance wages. , certainly the phone or the computer you used to post.

Duggys Housemate

dvpower wrote: »

I don't get the question. Why shouldn't it be a criminal matter? Is free trade some kind of basic human right?

Wy should it be a criminal matter? A group of garlic producers have the ear of some unelected official who decides the CAP rules in Europe, and they cost the rest of us by pushing up the cost of garlic. This is the cronyism. Thats the problem - the State/EU is protecting it's cronies at the cost of someone who wants to import at a normal cost, and jails the latter to protect the jobs of the former. He did pay 9% on these pseudo-onions, which is enough.


One more point here. Those of you who illegally download - and I don't include myself here, since I don't - are tax avoiders, as well as stealing from the copyright holders. Turn yourself in.

plasmaguy

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

If you think that there is a 232% charge on anything else imported from China then you really don't know what is going on. Pretty much everything in the shops is produced by cheap products manufactured in sweat shops for pittance wages. , certainly the phone or the computer you used to post.

If it was up to me, everything from China would have 232% duty on it.

I'm not sure why we should import anything from China to be honest. European and Irish manufacturing has been decimiated by cheap Chinese imports, much of it like I said, rip offs and counterfeited products at worst, and at best people slaving away in sweatshops to produce Ipads and cheap trainers, something the western consumer cares little about by the way.

Of course our idiot politicians in Ireland and Europe are all pushing for a globalised world with free trade with everyone, little understanding the consequences.

In terms of free trade with China, there will only be one winner, China.