Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Consolidated Corporate Tax Plans to go Ahead
Read more about: Irish Politics, Lisbon Treaty, Taxation
Laszlo Kovacs is EU Tax comissioner and a big fan of the CCCTB he announced today that plans will continue to bring forward proposals and an imapct assesment of the CCCTB to the French Presidency. It is possibly as much a function of French will as his own, Sarko is well miffed that we wrecked his grand plans for a Presidency by plunging the EU into politiking and his Finance Minister has already stated it would be part of their 6 month presidency.
A move like this would make a re-run of the treaty most difficult, since most of our politicians have spoken out against it. Having said that have we foregone any clout in arguing against it?
Cian, I wonder if we would have voted yes would we have had any clout in arguing against it. Dont think this news will help the yes side’s credibility much at all.
I think you might be right, the impression all along from France (and Germany too I think) is that this will happen come hell or high water. It was to be one of Sarko’s big Presidential flourishes. We on our own would be screwed one way or another.
The second point is Ireland has not even had a debate about what it was and could do, it was flagged that it will be rammed thru and yet Yes side wouldnt address it head on (I am not an expert, maybe its a bogeyman?)
Dont think this news will help the yes side’s credibility much at all.
Declan Ganley however……
We on our own would be screwed one way or another. No, I don’t think so. This is where the Yes argument comes in about alliances and diplomacy being far more important than voting weights. There are several other countries which are deadly opposed to more fiscal harmonisation. Sometimes for different reasons. But on CCTB specifically, Britain, Estonia and a couple of other newer members are opposed. It is ironic that increasingly Britain is our best ally in Europe (except on Farming!). They too are opposed to a two tier Europe because ultimately if such a situation arises, Britain too will be marginalised.
I wonder Tomaltach, is the two-tier Europe a real option. On a world stage could it present any greater strength as it does now if it sidelined key states? I am minded to think not.
You make a good point about diplomacy and no doubt it could be a bigger dogfight were we not on our own. Yet Franco-German support may be enough to push it thru-albeit with some compromises. Your saying the No vote has cost us though?
Ah come on! How long have elements of the French political establishment wanted things like a common corporate tax base and a European army?
They always want them. They never get them. There’s just too much opposition, and that’s likely to be the case for a very long time to come.
Niall - my own reason for posting it was as much for the optics (and message it sends the governemnt) about the attitude of the EU. Is it sending a signal that it goes on and we have to catch up? Or do the optics end up actually backing up the arguments of the No side, for whatever about the possibility of the French getting their way, they are trying quite soon after the referendum.
Cian,
You asked if I think the No vote has cost us. The truth is it is too early to say. In my opinion it is very highly unlikely that the core institutional arrangements will be re-opened. It is possible we might get a number of protocols to copperfasten our concerns in a number of areas - say military or tax. But to be honest I doubt they will have much meaning. It is remotely possible that we’d get a flat opt out of any future fiscal harmonisation (though not a veto over other countries using enhanced cooperation to organise a CCTB). It is also remotely possible, but only remotely, that for the time being the commission reduction will be postponed or some other formula found to ease the concerns of those who fear it is a big loss. Say that the commission must consult with a committee of members who represent states that are not present in the current commission.
Overall I assume that it is unlikely but just about possible that our positions can be clarified and improved upon. But on the other hand, the gamble we have taken with a No should be acknowledged. There will be an attempt to reach consensus but if push comes to shove we could be marginalised. Weighed against the possible gains, I don’t think it was a risk worth taking.
There is only one outcome that could have made rejection of Lisbon worthwhile and it is not going to happen: the Eu and national leaders who sponsor more integration devise a slower pace and one which brings people along with them. That would involve breaking up lisbon into chunks and re-running ratification with enhanced persuasion of why each tranche is necessary. They could deal first with institutional issues required for further expansion (a disappointed Croatia is now waiting in the wings in uncertainty). But this ‘long way round’ would be slow (though it would in the long run improve the Union). Sadly I fear it is highly unlikely. So we are left with a list of more unpalatable choices.