Should Mick Wallace resign over his VAT 'problem'?

expectationlost

No

well the tops name in the last election were ff sean connick and fg michael darcy jnr

CarrickMcJoe

No

jackhammer wrote: »

Not quite! He's a director of a the company, and he, as director, deliberately under-declared his VAT liability. That's a criminal offence.

I don't see the difference between him and that bloke, Begley whose company didn't pay tax on its garlic imports. He got 6 years for that, and that was a fraud of 1.4 million.

Let's see if Wallace faces the full rigours of the law, as did Begley. I won't hold my breath!

Yes, I agree but Begley must be sick in his cell tonight because he actually paid back all the VAT and penalties, but still got 6 years (which is costing the taxpayer) while Mick swans off to Poland to suppport Ireland.

This cheat has a neck like a jockey's arse!

Judgement Day

Don't care

donalg1 wrote: »

Well he wouldn't be any worse than Mick anyway who so far hasn't done a damn thing for wexford.

Can't believe he is at the euros too the sheer cheek of him is astonishing. He is off over there living it up at the tax payers expense and now he expects them to pay him another two million to top it off, and you actually defend him. I'd laugh if it wasn't so disgraceful.

You're all over the place in your argument. Mick Wallace was elected as a protest vote against the establishment and nobody I know expected him to transform County Wexford into some sort of thriving Irish version of Hong Kong or some such.

What's the 2 million you're talking about?

As for his trip to the Euros - is he not entitled to a break? People with jobs regularly take holidays while the rest of their colleagues stay working.

chieftan65

No

I think people are getting a bit ahead of themselves in this thread.
Firstly, before there's any talk of bi elections or replacements mick wallace's seat has to be vacant and from what i can see anyone who has the bare faced cheek to head off to watch soccer in poland when they're in the situation he's in wont walk away from a big salary too quickly.

secondly. why would a replacement have to be an established politician in wexford? maybe a good strong independant will come to the fore, someone who doesn't need the clown factor to be elected, someone who's actually tax complient, someone who doesn't have a hidden agenda to run for election. i know i know nice thought in an ideal world but we can always hope

donalg1

No

Judgement Day wrote: »

donalg1 wrote: »

Well he wouldn't be any worse than Mick anyway who so far hasn't done a damn thing for wexford.

Can't believe he is at the euros too the sheer cheek of him is astonishing. He is off over there living it up at the tax payers expense and now he expects them to pay him another two million to top it off, and you actually defend him. I'd laugh if it wasn't so disgraceful.

You're all over the place in your argument. Mick Wallace was elected as a protest vote against the establishment and nobody I know expected him to transform County Wexford into some sort of thriving Irish version of Hong Kong or some such.

What's the 2 million you're talking about?

As for his trip to the Euros - is he not entitled to a break? People with jobs regularly take holidays while the rest of their colleagues stay working.

Are you kidding? He owes the state two million quid that's what I'm talking about. That money has to come from somewhere and it won't be him so its left to the tax payer to foot the bill one way or another.

And no he doesn't deserve a holiday he has been on one since he was elected. He owes the state two million he shouldn't be able to afford to go on holidays, but he is using taxpayers money again to fund his holiday.

Are you actually so delusion that you think his actions can be defended surely nobody can be that stupid

horses4courses

No

I don't know why people are even talking about this. Obvious the Paddy psyche doesn't have the confidence in the relevant authorities to deal with this. During which he should be suspended from public office. end of.

Chiparus

Don't care

Interesting how the media has really gone after mick on this one, last week this story hardly got a mention

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0526/1224316733140.html

I suppose there are enough muppets that can be whipped up into a frenzy -
there is more written about this than Berties "horse racing" good fortune.

Chiparus

Don't care

donalg1 wrote: »

Are you kidding? He owes the state two million quid that's what I'm talking about. That money has to come from somewhere and it won't be him so its left to the tax payer to foot the bill one way or another.

And no he doesn't deserve a holiday he has been on one since he was elected. He owes the state two million he shouldn't be able to afford to go on holidays, but he is using taxpayers money again to fund his holiday.

Are you actually so delusion that you think his actions can be defended surely nobody can be that stupid

Wallace used money that was for the taxman to pay his workers, so should we go after the workers because they received stolen property?

vicwatson

No

Can't imagine the Wexford forum has has as many hits in ages:rolleyes:

donalg1

No

Chiparus wrote: »

donalg1 wrote: »

Are you kidding? He owes the state two million quid that's what I'm talking about. That money has to come from somewhere and it won't be him so its left to the tax payer to foot the bill one way or another.

And no he doesn't deserve a holiday he has been on one since he was elected. He owes the state two million he shouldn't be able to afford to go on holidays, but he is using taxpayers money again to fund his holiday.

Are you actually so delusion that you think his actions can be defended surely nobody can be that stupid

Wallace used money that was for the taxman to pay his workers, so should we go after the workers because they received stolen property?

No as that would be stupid because they didn't knowingly do it unlike him of course. He knowingly charged his customers vat and instead of passing it on to the revenue he pocketed it. Besides most of it was most likely used on doubling his and his sons salaries and not on the salaries of his employees. So silly question really.

vicwatson

No

effemall wrote: »

Maybe hes wexfords version of Jackie Healey Rae

If only Wexford had a politcian as aware

vicwatson

No

Mick Wallace was elected as a protest vote against the establishment

You DO NOT KNOW THAT.

Why people voted that way.

You dont know

Incisor

No

I might be insane but should anyone who has evaded tax for whatever reason not be automatically removed as a public representative or be automatically refused the chance to stand for office? If you refuse to financially support the institutions of the state should you not be refused to have a say on how taxpayers money is spent?

Chiparus

Don't care

donalg1 wrote: »

No as that would be stupid because they didn't knowingly do it unlike him of course. He knowingly charged his customers vat and instead of passing it on to the revenue he pocketed it. Besides most of it was most likely used on doubling his and his sons salaries and not on the salaries of his employees. So silly question really.

Pocketed IT?

So he kept it for himself? or did he pay his workers? how much did he pay himself and his son ? 140k each- sure NAMA pays developers more than that. Hardly excessive compared to what others paid and nowhere near the 2.1 million you accuse him of pocketing.



WHat we have here is the MOB, fanned by the gutter media and dear old Joe. The fools whipped into a frenzy.

The Dail know they cannot do anything to Wallace, all this happened before he was a TD. The committees would be very careful to have any adverse findings against him ( the Callally findings were crushed in the HC).

Chiparus

Don't care

jpb1974 wrote: »

He should be forced to cut his hair, don a suit, shirt & tie and paraded around in public.

and go to funerals?:rolleyes:

Judgement Day

Don't care

vicwatson wrote: »

You DO NOT KNOW THAT.

Why people voted that way.

You dont know

Obviously I don't 'know' that but a lot of people I know have told me that was their main reason for voting for Mick - it's anecdotal not based on an opinion poll. It certainly was my reason and the reason I would give him my #1 again.

Judgement Day

Don't care

Incisor wrote: »

I might be insane but should anyone who has evaded tax for whatever reason not be automatically removed as a public representative or be automatically refused the chance to stand for office? If you refuse to financially support the institutions of the state should you not be refused to have a say on how taxpayers money is spent?

You are insane - the law is the law and there's nothing in it to suggest that Mick Wallace can/should be removed from office.

bmaxi

No

I don't know why we keep hearing cries of "witch hunt", it's not a witch hunt, the guy is guilty, he admitted it.
Anybody supporting Wallace over this issue must be happy with the idea of someone putting his hand in their pocket and stealing their money because that's what it amounts to. We all got very upset and rightly so, about the household charge which stood to realise 160 million from every household in the country yet some are willing to excuse the defrauding of 2million to the same exchequer by one individual. Double standards, methinks.

bruschi

what I find most odd, is that when he was in most trouble with finances, and when he was not contributing to his workers pension funds and when he was pocketing tax money that people had spent on buying property from him, he managed to double his own wages and himself and his son took nearly €290,000 in wages. How does that tally up with someone who was doing things in the best interest of his business? His employees wages were being slashed, and others being let go, and subcontractors were being left short of money, and are still after being left short.

I have respect for him in some of the things he does, and knowing him, he is a decent guy, but I just dont buy the whole woe is me sob story and how he is just being honest. He was looking after number 1 and made mugs of people working for him, subcontracting for him and buying from him.

I also find it ironic, that he was so vocal in his non payment to the household charge, when the money he owes revenue would pay for half of his constituency's population.

I dont begrudge him going to Poland either, he has been to every major tournament for the last 30 years or more. He always goes, and its no surprise to see him go. Everyone knows he was always going, so why people are getting upset over that I dont know.

There is no witch hunt either. He didnt pay revenue €2.1m. that is a serious offence, and granted, it wouldnt get the publicity it is generating now if he wasnt a TD, but being in the role of the TD, it is a reflection of his constituency and the people he is representing.

Chiparus

Don't care

But he did not personally gain from it. He used the money to pay his workers.

Cedrus

Chiparus wrote: »

But he did not personally gain from it. He used the money to pay his workers.

That's not in any way relevant, what criminals do with their loot is not the crime of which they are convicted.

bruschi

Chiparus wrote: »

But he did not personally gain from it. He used the money to pay his workers.

not sure how you can claim he did not personally gain from it when he cut his employees wages and laid off others, didnt contribute to his workers pension funds, and also left subcontractors short. All this when his wages increased by a substantial amount, and all the while being able to keep up multiple properties that he personally owned.

granted, he did what he could to keep things afloat, but this whole I lived a simple life, and didnt personally gain from it is crap. he's being honest with some things, but not others. how can you justify taking wages of €290,000 out of a company that wasnt paying debts.

donalg1

No

Chiparus wrote: »

But he did not personally gain from it. He used the money to pay his workers.

Ha ha how is doubling his salary not personally gaining from it?

Seriously?

christmas2012

No

There are so many in government with financial problems its no wonder they get us the public in debt,if youre going to throw mick out throw the rest of those nepotists,cronys micks and gombeens right out the door with him.
The problem is we dont have enough choice when it comes to political leadership,were not given proper access to voting and who decides to vote on what,its a closed door system i feel,if youre not in you dont get influence,its that simple really.No room for the voter(the outsider),we should demand better.
Having said all that though i do think he should resign what can he add to the table,nothing just money problems,will probably have some government agency bail him out..All take take take,its all about them and THEIR influence,dont for a minute fool yourself and think they join politics to represent you.

redhot

No

Its a No-brainer, sack him and cancel his pension. Anyone who disagrees with this has their head in the sand. We need the people to rise up against this bunch of takers, and have passionate people running the country, not dossers.

Actually you can judge a book by the cover, Mick wallace has taken us for a ride, and can't be bothered to smarten up. If it waddles like a duck, swims like a duck, and looks like a duck, it usually is A DUCK!

Judgement Day

Don't care

redhot wrote: »

Its a No-brainer, sack him and cancel his pension. Anyone who disagrees with this has their head in the sand. We need the people to rise up against this bunch of takers, and have passionate people running the country, not dossers.

Actually you can judge a book by the cover, Mick wallace has taken us for a ride, and can't be bothered to smarten up. If it waddles like a duck, swims like a duck, and looks like a duck, it usually is A DUCK!

You are either too young to remember, or deliberately choose to forget, that it was the crooks in bespoke suits like Haughey, Ray Burke, Ahern etc. that destroyed this country not ageing hippies like Mick Wallace - with him what you see is what you get!

christmas2012

No

with him what you see is what you get a **** up is what he is.. just like the rest of them,who a government agency are bailing out..he has plenty in common with the other shower,dont mind his ming flanagan hippy dope exterior,he is still like the rest of those gombeens the only difference is hes long hair and a pink shirt.

im not fooled by him he is a parasite just like the rest of them,hes in debt he has nama with him a government agency bailing him out,and they say there in it for the people..my ass they are

Tzar Chasm

Don't care

When did hairy go into NAMA?

Serious question, I don't recall him getting any bailout, please back up your allegations

christmas2012

No

google mick wallace and recievership or google mick wallace and NAMA hes everywhere on it..Have a nosey..

Tzar Chasm

Don't care

Yeah, his company is in recievership, but that's not NAMA