Munroe: penalty for webshops never mentioned

By SANCHESKA BROWN

Tribune Staff Reporter

sbrown@tribunemedia.net

ATTORNEY Wayne Munroe, who represents the owners of five webshops, said yesterday that the government has never mentioned to him or his clients anything about imposing a “penalty” for revenue generated by the sector prior to regulation.

In fact, Mr Munroe said he was under the impression that his clients would only be required to pay “back business licence fees” before they would be able to be regularised.

His comments came a day after Attorney General Allyson Maynard-Gibson said the government will impose a penalty on webshops’ illegal operations prior to the implementation of a new regulatory framework for the sector.

Yesterday Minister of Tourism Obie Wilchcombe, who has responsibility for gaming, told The Tribune the government intends to impose a one-time penalty on revenue generated prior to regularisation.

“We have been in consultation with the government and through all of our discussions there was never an indication, well it didn’t come across like that to me, about any penalty,” Mr Munroe said.

“What I was told, the impression I got was that the government said ‘Hey, we will set aside this argument about whether or not what you did was illegal’. . . and we will just be required to pay back business licence fees,” he said.

“The impression we got was that the government would audit the business and compare what the business paid in licence fees, their declarations, as opposed to what the auditors feel should have been paid, based on their income and make them pay the difference.

“People keep talking about a penalty but that is not a penalty. You can not charge a penalty for something that they claim was illegal. 

“This is not a penalty and paying back business licence fees makes sense, no one can complain about that. Under the Business (Licence) Act, the government can only go back three years.”

Mr Munroe admitted that he has not seen the proposed legislation yet so he can not express a view on what the government intends to do.

He said: “We haven’t seen anything, so I do not know what they are going to propose. My clients will not like having to pay but they understand it. No one likes paying taxes but they know they have to do what they have to do to continue to operate.”

Prime Minister Perry Christie recently affirmed the government’s intention to regulate the underground sector and said the industry’s taxes will be retroactive to July 1. The gaming legislation is expected to be presented in the House of Assembly next week.

Comments

The_Oracle says...

Penalty? How about 100% of revenues and assets derived therefrom?
Let 'em all start from scratch, equal footing.
Quite frankly this is all bollocks.
Are not the proceeds from the other major illegal activity confiscated upon conviction?
Oh, sorry, another of our laws not enforced.
One National Lottery with the proceeds to national infrastructure,
NOT the general account to be slushed and wasted.

Posted 25 June 2014, 9:28 a.m. Suggest removal

John says...

There seems to be a serious disconnect between different government agencies as to exactly what the real government policy is. For example in the heat of all the media frenzy about Lady Pindling's unpaid property tax: Some are saying that she is a tax dodger and is not fit to hold public office, especially that of governor general. Others are saying that she was entitled to an exemption when she turned 65 so she had, in fact, paid two years more in taxes that she was required to, under the law. The media hardly carried this part of the story, because their intent was obvious by the orchestrated manner in which they leaked the $300,000.00 outstanding tax debt. In the main time the prime minister was also in the press saying because of the financial situation the country was in, the government has incentives in place to encourage persons who would not normally pay their property tax to go in and pay. But if you call the Ministry of Finance they are telling callers they know of no such initiatives and that the amnesty period of which the prime minister may be speaking of ended in December 2013. So which is it?

Posted 25 June 2014, 9:37 a.m. Suggest removal

Well_mudda_take_sic says...

Mrs Ping is indeed a tax dodger (albeit possibly a paid up one at this time when it comes to her real property tax). There is no such thing as a real property tax exemption for anyone once they reach age 65. Furthermore, Mrs Ping can hardly claim to be a financial hardship case when she is receiving pensions and allowances from our Public Treasury in excess of $100,000 per annum while also living in a lakeside mansion on an 11 acre estate in an upscale Cable Beach neighbourhood! She and her family thought they could get away with paying no real property tax out of a grandiose sense of entitlement. Our country has bestowed many riches on Mrs Ping and the least she can do is pay her fair share of taxes on time as required by the law, rather than embarrassing the Bahamian people as she has done.

Posted 25 June 2014, 10:01 a.m. Suggest removal

JohnDoe says...

Mr. Munroe has raised the pivotal question of how can our government create a law that retroactively establishes an arbitrary penalty for a prior act deemed to be illegal that possibly contradicts the current law and penalties for those same deemed illegal acts. The legal implications are scary and this appear to be another issue that was not well thought out. If our government is now so convinced that laws have been broken such that they are now prepared to be judge and jury and summarily establish an arbitrary retroactive penalty what does that say about their integrity and actions, or lack of action, to date with respect to this issue?

Posted 25 June 2014, 10:50 a.m. Suggest removal

Well_mudda_take_sic says...

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Posted 25 June 2014, 11:11 a.m.

Log in to comment