From Mr E. Privitera

Recently, we read that the government was offering concessions to VAT defaulters going back to 1999. It was said that about 4,200 operators owe Lm9 million in taxes and Lm28 million in penalties. It was further stated that 11 of the defaulting operators “owe over Lm30,000” each!

All the 4,200 defaulters were to be informed through a letter, that if they regularise their position by 30 June, the government “will waive the Lm5.1 million they owe in penalties”.

By the time I had finished reading this in the papers, my blood was nearing boiling point! Because I recalled what had been written by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue, on 31 August, regarding my objection to being charged interest and a hefty penalty, for the time lost when I appealed to the Board of Special Commissioners and the Court of Appeal regarding alimony payments which were not considered for deduction from my income, while those of other separated people who did not have a consensual agreement, were granted the deduction of alimony they were forced to pay their spouse by the court.

In the Commissioner of Inland Revenue’s letter, it was said, among other things: “Mr Privitera knew (I didn’t) that if he objects to any tax bill and appeals to the Court, this would mean that he would be lengthening the period of time on which the penalty would be based and would also increase the interest. Although the total amount is not insignificant (and how!) I think that Mr Privitera appreciates (I don’t!) also that there were thousands of taxpayers who, for one reason or another, were fined penalties and interest. So an injustice will be done if in one case we act in one way and act differently in another one”.

Despite the fact that the Ombudsman “recommended” – since he cannot enforce his decisions – that my case deserved a refund of the penalties and interest (I was certainly not to blame for the long delay in the Court of Appeal), the parliamentary secretary in the Ministry of Finance, the Hon. Tonio Fenech, refused to comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendation.

That was not the end of the story. I now have pending another “mysterious” bill from the Commissioner of Inland Revenue – Lm1,316 as “additional tax” – due to some mysterious “omission” for the basis year 1998, when I was assured by the Customer Care official at the department, that I do not owe a single cent of tax for that year!

Let’s see how this latest travesty of justice will end. Will the Commissioner of Inland Revenue remember what he wrote on 31 August 2004, that “an injustice would be done if in one case we act in one way and act differently in another one”, considering the way the Ministry of Finance, which is also responsible for his department, is acting in the case of certain operators who owe more than Lm30,000, when I do not owe a single cent to his department for basis year 1998?

Is it not strange that while the Ministry of Finance is ready “to waive Lm5.1 million in penalties” I have been denied the waiver of Lm872 (excluding the pending Lm1,316) in penalties and interest, despite having the Ombudsman’s recommendation backing my claim!

Are my Labour sympathies the problem?

Eddy Privitera

MOSTA