Mick Wallace gets away scott free with it.

paddy147 · 27-08-2012 09:00PM #1

He wont be persued for not paying the VAT.

The Full story is in todays Evening Herald newspaper.

http://www.herald.ie/news/wallace-delight-as-enforcer-wont-go-after-him-3210900.html

Id love to be a politician,because it seems like a really nice comfy life to have.

No matter what you do and how you act,it seems you wont be touched or done for anything.

Yet Phil Hogan will have people who didnt pay/couldnt pay a 100 euro HHC up in court and done for that.

Isnt it a great society we live in today.

PS-A fruit and veg business chap who didnt declare the garlic propperly and made a full upfront settlement with revenue still gets jailed for 6 years....but Mick Wallace gets away with his carry on.

Justice eh???:rolleyes::rolleyes:

NIMAN · 28-08-2012 01:28AM

Agree 100%.

Knowingly trying to underpay Revenue by over a million, you get off with it, yet we have people in jail for minor offences.

FreudianSlippers · 28-08-2012 06:32AM

I don't think he's "getting away with" anything major in terms of the article tbh. The ODCE is not pursuing him for breaches of the Companies Acts (for which they didn't find enough evidence... yet); he was pursued by Revenue and had he not reached a settlement with them he would have been pursued just as the Begley character (for a different type of thing though obviously).

You also have to understand that you're comparing apples and oranges garlic in terms of legislation. Begley was charged with evading customs duty which carried statutory penalties such as jail time. I'm not very familiar with the VAT Act, but I'm not sure it does carry jail sentencing for false declarations of VAT.

Finally, just because the ODCE isn't going to pursue him and Revenue has settled with him, it does not mean that the DPP couldn't initiate proceedings against him if they find a criminal wrong.

That said, I still think he is getting off lightly. It also has sweet feck all to do with the household charge.

itzme · 28-08-2012 08:45AM

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't think he's "getting away with" anything major in terms of the article tbh. The ODCE is not pursuing him for breaches of the Companies Acts (for which they didn't find enough evidence... yet); he was pursued by Revenue and had he not reached a settlement with them he would have been pursued just as the Begley character (for a different type of thing though obviously).

You also have to understand that you're comparing apples and oranges garlic in terms of legislation. Begley was charged with evading customs duty which carried statutory penalties such as jail time. I'm not very familiar with the VAT Act, but I'm not sure it does carry jail sentencing for false declarations of VAT.

Finally, just because the ODCE isn't going to pursue him and Revenue has settled with him, it does not mean that the DPP couldn't initiate proceedings against him if they find a criminal wrong.

That said, I still think he is getting off lightly. It also has sweet feck all to do with the household charge.

Also if I'm not mistaken with Begley, the prosecution and conviction of Begley came after he made an agreement with revenue to re-pay the customs duty. I think he'd been repaying it for a couple of years before he was convicted.

Dannyboy83 · 28-08-2012 09:58AM

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm not very familiar with the VAT Act, but I'm not sure it does carry jail sentencing for false declarations of VAT.

It does.

In fact, there has been a marked increase in the number of the jail sentences for VAT offences in recent years, for example:
http://www.williamfry.ie/publication-article/prison_terms_for_tax_offences_on_the_increase.aspx

Revenue do not pursue sentences for people with tax debts, they aim to settle with them.
They do pursue sentences for fraud, stringently.

As a TD, this guy should be held to a higher standard than the rest of us.
There is no ethical reason why this should be allowed to happen, this is the type of corruption we criticise Russia for on a weekly basis.

Laminations · 28-08-2012 10:06AM

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't think he's "getting away with" anything major in terms of the article tbh. The ODCE is not pursuing him for breaches of the Companies Acts (for which they didn't find enough evidence... yet); he was pursued by Revenue and had he not reached a settlement with them he would have been pursued just as the Begley character (for a different type of thing though obviously).

You also have to understand that you're comparing apples and oranges garlic in terms of legislation. Begley was charged with evading customs duty which carried statutory penalties such as jail time. I'm not very familiar with the VAT Act, but I'm not sure it does carry jail sentencing for false declarations of VAT.

Finally, just because the ODCE isn't going to pursue him and Revenue has settled with him, it does not mean that the DPP couldn't initiate proceedings against him if they find a criminal wrong.

That said, I still think he is getting off lightly. It also has sweet feck all to do with the household charge.

Begley was cooperating fully with revenue and in a position to pay the full amount back with penalties. The judge issued a sentence (he didn't have to) to send a message that misdeclaring tax in such large sums, even if it could be later paid back, was totally unacceptable. No such message seems to be sent to Waalace. He hasn't a hope in paying it back. He only admitted it when Revenue issued its audit and why they settled when there was no chance of him meeting the settlement amount is beyond me. Wallace admitted he under declared tax purposely and in full knowledge that it was wrong. What more evidence do the ODCE need? A rabbit to crawl out his ass wearing a burglar costume?? Wallace has confessed. He should be pursued by all means and made an example out of. For christs sake he hasn't even been made bankrupt yet by the banks that he'll never repay.

He needs to lose his seat and face jail time so people are reassured politicians live under the same laws as the rest of us.

28-08-2012 10:16AM

I blame the morons who voted him in.

The corporate enforcement watchdog has decided not to investigate Mr Wallace's role in under-declaring €1.4m of VAT in his construction company, the Irish Independent has learned.

In one of his final acts before stepping down at the end of this month, Director of Corporate Enforcement Paul Appleby said he did not propose to carry out an investigation into M&J Wallace at this time.

He said the VAT returns of companies -- including any falsification in those returns -- were "a matter for the Revenue Commissioners".

But as the Revenue has already opted to make a €2.1m settlement with Mr Wallace's company, he is now highly unlikely to face any prosecution.

Where is the difference here between Begley and Wallace?

Laminations · 28-08-2012 10:24AM

At least one TD, Tom Barry, isn't letting this lie. Apparently he intends to get a proper explanation from the ODCE as to their decision. He made the original complaint about Wallace to the ODCE

bbam · 28-08-2012 12:28PM

Laminations wrote: »

At least one TD, Tom Barry, isn't letting this lie. Apparently he intends to get a proper explanation from the ODCE as to their decision. He made the original complaint about Wallace to the ODCE

Wow. One of them, out of how many.
We should be so proud of our elected representatives. One of them maybe has the intention to follow up on it. The truth is that it's an old boys network up there in the big house. I will be shocked if Wallace faces anything over this, most of the TDs are too afraid their own dirt will come to the surface.
We live in a two tiered system in this country, there are those who pay for everything with their taxes, and then there are those who screw us and walk away because of who they are.

pwurple · 28-08-2012 04:16PM

He only needs to cling on in there as a TD for a few more months... and then he has his two years done. TD's pension.

paddy147 · 28-08-2012 04:44PM

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't think he's "getting away with" anything major in terms of the article tbh. The ODCE is not pursuing him for breaches of the Companies Acts (for which they didn't find enough evidence... yet); he was pursued by Revenue and had he not reached a settlement with them he would have been pursued just as the Begley character (for a different type of thing though obviously).

You also have to understand that you're comparing apples and oranges garlic in terms of legislation. Begley was charged with evading customs duty which carried statutory penalties such as jail time. I'm not very familiar with the VAT Act, but I'm not sure it does carry jail sentencing for false declarations of VAT.

Finally, just because the ODCE isn't going to pursue him and Revenue has settled with him, it does not mean that the DPP couldn't initiate proceedings against him if they find a criminal wrong.

That said, I still think he is getting off lightly. It also has sweet feck all to do with the household charge.

With reference to how the goverment and law will pursue a person for not being able to pay a 100 euro HHC and then the govement and law not going after Mick Wallace........

How can one person be hounded and brought to court and done for 100 euro...but yet a different person (politician) be just let off the hook for over a million plus euro.The politician gets off scott free and is now laughing his head off now at it.

How is the law and system fair and equal here then?????

Mick Wallace should be chased down and hounded by the law and be done too,for what he has done...none of this "walk on water shyte" anymore.

Enough is enough.......people want to see justice accross the board..and especially when it comes to an elected politician and his terrible dis-honest carry on.

NIMAN · 28-08-2012 05:15PM

The last election brought us all a promise that politics was going to change in this country. Many of them touted this on the election trial, ESPECIALLY the new breed of politician like Mick Wallace.

It appears that nothing has changed, and these 'new' politicians are just like the old ones. As long as I'm ok Jack, bugger the rest of you. They pretend they care about the common man? They only care about themselves.

paddy147 · 28-08-2012 05:30PM

1 man pays up in full with revenue,and still gets 6 years in jail.

HARD PRESSED people get put in jail,because they cant afford a utility bill and have no way to pay it back (enemployment).

Mick Wallace pulls his deliberate stunt,gets away with it..and even gets a pat on the back and a big handshake from all his political buddies and friends in high places..."ah god love you Mick".

Mick Wallace now laughs his head off and thinks its all a great laugh now.

Yep,justice is done and served out evenly in this country...

28-08-2012 09:46PM

And who are his political buddies? Let's be clear; we all know who his supporters are, and it's not the supposed 'elite' that people are referring to here...

It's the supposed bastions of the proletariat who are protecting this guy.

dvpower · 29-08-2012 06:01PM

NIMAN wrote: »

Agree 100%.

Knowingly trying to underpay Revenue by over a million, you get off with it, yet we have people in jail for minor offences.

No way. Didn't Paddy tell you. That 'fruit and veg' guy got 6 years.

christmas2012 · 29-08-2012 06:02PM

He should have gotten a good few years in jail

Scortho · 29-08-2012 06:22PM

If i was Begley I'd be appealing my sentence straight away!
Wallace collects Vat for Revenue but under declares it to reduce bill. Uses money instead to shore up failing business! Reckless trading surely?
He's unable to repay the money to revenue and has in affect stolen their money.

On the other hand Paul Begley imports garlic as apples to avoid the import duty! Eventually gets caught out and agrees to repay revenue the money owed.
While what he did was wrong and most likely gave him an unfair advantage over his customers surely the fact that he was repaying revenue makes up for this. He most likely has to pay interest and fines on top of that!

The judge said that he wanted to make an example to the general public! Surely if Revenue (who brought it to the courts/dcc's attention) wanted to make an example the best person would have been a TD.

Now all it looks like is one rule for T.Ds/property developer and another rule for everyone else!

29-08-2012 06:32PM

Scortho wrote: »

Now all it looks like is one rule for T.Ds/property developer and another rule for everyone else!

But, but...Mick Wallace is one of us!

paddy147 · 29-08-2012 06:34PM

dvpower wrote: »

No way. Didn't Paddy tell you. That 'fruit and veg' guy got 6 years.

So what then...because Mick Wallace is a serving TD,then hes a "saint" and should not be touched??

Every newspaper is up in arms over this and they also raise a very vailid point about Paul Begley lodging an appeal.

At least he made a full settlement with Revenue,unlike Wallace.:rolleyes:

FreudianSlippers · 29-08-2012 06:34PM

Scortho wrote: »

If i was Begley I'd be appealing my sentence straight away!
Wallace collects Vat for Revenue but under declares it to reduce bill. Uses money instead to shore up failing business! Reckless trading surely?
He's unable to repay the money to revenue and has in affect stolen their money.

On the other hand Paul Begley imports garlic as apples to avoid the import duty! Eventually gets caught out and agrees to repay revenue the money owed.
While what he did was wrong and most likely gave him an unfair advantage over his customers surely the fact that he was repaying revenue makes up for this. He most likely has to pay interest and fines on top of that!

The judge said that he wanted to make an example to the general public! Surely if Revenue (who brought it to the courts/dcc's attention) wanted to make an example the best person would have been a TD.

Now all it looks like is one rule for T.Ds/property developer and another rule for everyone else!

They are different offences though. It's like a rapist appealing their sentence because a murderer got a lesser sentence.

_Kaiser_ · 29-08-2012 06:35PM

What I always find "funny" in these threads is the surprise that nothing will come of the latest scandal/corruption/outrage to emerge from our "leaders"

I mean, is it really that big a surprise that, in a nation that revolves completely around the concept of "who you know"/"depends who you get", where everyone tries to "get away" with everything - whether it's a speeding fine or more serious -and where it's all about "keeping up with the Joneses"/whining about them apparently doing better than you are, that we have corruption and incompetence all throughout the system.

How many of the outraged posters in threads like this are outraged because it happens, or outraged because they themselves haven't the neck to try it?

Until we grow up as a people and stop trying to screw each other over to feather our own nests, until the concept of "the greater good" becomes more than a sound-bite, and most importantly until we realise and accept responsibility for the consequences of our decisions and actions (speeding fines, bad investments, whatever) nothing will ever change in this parochial, corrupt little backwater.

FreudianSlippers · 29-08-2012 06:38PM

paddy147 wrote: »

So what then...because Mick Wallace is a serving TD,then hes a "saint" and should not be touched??

Every newspaper is up in arms over this and they also raise a very vailid point about Paul Begley lodging an appeal.

At least he made a full settlement with Revenue,unlike Wallace.:rolleyes:

Literally nobody is saying that as far as I can see. It's just typical know-it-all brigade that seems to come out in the Irish media; the ones who seem to know everything about who is guilty of what and know the companies acts inside and out.

I laid it out clearly before but the nonsense carries on:

The ODCE found no evidence he had breached the companies acts;
He made a settlement with Revenue who decided not to pursue him further;
The DPP can and may still bring charges against Wallace.

Therefore, by definition, he has not gotten "away scott free with it".

EDIT: I should add, that I think Wallace is a plonker and a half with his stupid hair, pink shirts and his blindly anti-Europe stance on just about everything. I also don't think he is fit to remain as a TD. But the point remains that no matter how much I don't like him and it is ridiculous that he would declare false VAT returns, the facts are that he hasn't gotten away with anything he is guilty of (yet).

paddy147 · 29-08-2012 06:44PM

Ah sure you anything that anyone else says here in "nonsence" to you.

Funny how Revenue were very quick to jump in and freeze a Target Exprsses bank accounts and let 400 people lose their jobs.

Funny how they can cause a man to go to jail for 6 years,even he settles in full with them.

But they can let "certain people" away with things.

Funny world we live in today.

Scortho · 29-08-2012 06:59PM

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

They are different offences though. It's like a rapist appealing their sentence because a murderer got a lesser sentence.

Its like a person underdeclaring import taxes, getting 6 years in jail and repaying money owed while a while a person convicted of sexual assault gets 6 months!:eek:
That certainly isn't fair.

Did both Paul and Mick Wallace act wrongly? Yes they did.
Did both Paul and Mick effectively steal from the revenue? Yes they did.
Both got caught.
Paul agrees to pay back all monies owed. Gets 6 years in jail.
Mick says f**K off i have no money. No jail sentence.
The only message this sends out is if you under declare vat and refuse to pay revenue, nothing will happen.

In my books both of these people should have raceived jail time. Wallace should receive more however as he isnt paying back

FreudianSlippers · 29-08-2012 07:00PM

paddy147 wrote: »

Ah sure you anything that anyone else says here in "nonsence" to you.

Funny how Revenue were very quick to jump in and freeze a Target Exprsses bank accounts and let 400 people lose their jobs.

Funny how they can cause a man to go to jail for 6 years,even he settles in full with them.

But they can let "certain people" away with things.

Funny world we live in today.

The frustrating thing is that you are either purposely misrepresenting the situation or cannot see that there is a difference in the 3 scenarios that you are comparing as the same.

Your OP is about Wallace not being pursued by the ODCE - I have explained why this is not "getting away with it".

Revenue, correctly, attached the debts of Target Express and froze the assets until a liquidator can take his/her place. It might seem odd to you, but this is pretty standard revenue procedure.

Perhaps you have a great insight into the books of Mr Wallace's and Mr Begley's companies as well as Target Express, but I don't. So I am going to let the ODCE and Revenue do their jobs and see if the DPP wants to do anything about theirs.

EDIT: I should also say that under Section 1078 of the TCA 1997 the DPP can opt for jail time; 12 months summary or 5 years on indictment. Revenue, as a non-preferred creditor of his already insolvent group had a decision to make: take the settlement and let him walk, or pursue him and get nothing. In Begley's case (under a different offence carrying different penalties and under different circumstances) they got both.

paddy147 · 29-08-2012 08:21PM

FreudianSlippers.....I notice that you wont answer anyone else who says the exact same thing as myself and asks the same thing as myself about the justice system and revenue,and how its ok for 1 person to be jailed for 6 year (even when he pays back in full),but for another "high profile TD" to pull a fast one,wont pay and then walks away laughing his head off.

Mick Wallaces owes well north of 1 million euro,doesnt he?

Revenue jump right in and shut down Target Express at the click of a finger,(company trading in Ireland since 1988) for a mere 300,00 euro (compared to Wallaces amount) and just on 400 jobs are lost as a result.

dvpower · 29-08-2012 08:59PM

paddy147 wrote: »

Revenue jump right in and shut down Target Express at the click of a finger.

If you believe that that's an accurate representation then you are quite mad.

On reflection, you can disregard the qualification.

paddy147 · 29-08-2012 09:02PM

dvpower wrote: »

If you believe that that's an accurate representation then you are quite mad.

On reflection, you can disregard the qualification.

If you are going to quote me..then quote my entire post and respond to ALL OF IT.

dvpower · 29-08-2012 09:31PM

paddy147 wrote: »

If you are going to quote me..then quote my entire post and respond to ALL OF IT.

Did I miss something relevant?

Cookie_Monster · 29-08-2012 09:39PM

the difference is only semantics. Why did the revenue settle with him and not others at the end of the day?

kippy · 29-08-2012 09:44PM

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

What I always find "funny" in these threads is the surprise that nothing will come of the latest scandal/corruption/outrage to emerge from our "leaders"

I mean, is it really that big a surprise that, in a nation that revolves completely around the concept of "who you know"/"depends who you get", where everyone tries to "get away" with everything - whether it's a speeding fine or more serious -and where it's all about "keeping up with the Joneses"/whining about them apparently doing better than you are, that we have corruption and incompetence all throughout the system.

How many of the outraged posters in threads like this are outraged because it happens, or outraged because they themselves haven't the neck to try it?

Until we grow up as a people and stop trying to screw each other over to feather our own nests, until the concept of "the greater good" becomes more than a sound-bite, and most importantly until we realise and accept responsibility for the consequences of our decisions and actions (speeding fines, bad investments, whatever) nothing will ever change in this parochial, corrupt little backwater.

I'd agree with this summation (not particularily the backwater sentiment, nor the inference that this is the only country in the developed world that this type of thing goes on in.)

Look over this forum and others like it. A scandal/injustice is discussed almost weekly, usually involving politicians or those at the highest levels of society. The common theme amoung all of these types of threads is the indignation of the posters (myself included) and the ultimate fizzling out of the thread as the newer and more recent injustice/crime comes along. Everyone forgets about the old one and moves on.
We've had threads on a number of politicians(sometimes multiple threads on the same politician years apart) and their behaviour, a number of business people and indeed on how the law is an ass in this country yet nothing, fundamentally has changed at any level to less the occurance of these events.

Default behaviour of politicians in these situations is to put the head down, the storm will pass, carry on as normal, cash in.

Mick Wallace gets away scott free with it.

Comments