Sunday Independent journalist and Bertie worshipper Jody Corcoran did a forensic examination of Ahern’s tax affairs in last Sunday’s paper. The article makes extensive use of correspondence between Ahern and Revenue in an attempt to rationalise the Taoiseach’s fantasy tales.
Working from a place far more distant than Bertie’s fantasy land, Corcoran makes the following defence.
1. Ahern saw no reason to contact Revenue because he was advised (by his tax advisor) that he had no tax liability in relation to funds received in 1993/94.
2. When Ahern told the Dail on September 27, 2006 that he had checked with the ‘tax authorities’ in relation to the Dublin payments what he actually meant to say was that he had consulted with ‘authorities on tax’ i.e., his tax advisors.
Corcoran puts this error down to Bertie’s ‘unique ability to mangle the English language’.
3. Because there are no written records of the various ‘dig outs’ Revenue has no case. Corcoran triumphantly concludes;
“Without evidence to the contrary, Mr. Ahern’s account of the Dublin loans and Manchester gifts still hangs together.”
“It seems likely the taxman, without evidence to the contrary, must accept the Taoiseach’s account.”
Bertie has no responsibility for non payment of tax because that’s what his tax advisor told him. In other words, ‘nothing to do with me’ It’s the tax advisors fault.
Bertie didn’t actually lie to our parliament when he said he had checked with the tax authorities. He was, apparently, misunderstood because he doesn’t know how to speak properly.
Revenue will have to take Bertie’s word for it because there is no written evidence to the contrary.
This logic can also be used to prove that Santa Claus exists.