Lurking in a small part of the background of the enormous VAT scam that has recently come to light is a very curious fact: fines on late VAT returns are so draconian that it is government’s policy to waive them off when a business falls in line! This is nothing but an official admission that the collection of these fines contemplated by the VAT law cannot, in fact, be enforced! The bit about the waiving of the fines being subject to business falling in line is, of course, a meaningless face saver. Those who do not eventually ‘fall in line’ - because they have misspent moneys they collected on behalf of the government – cannot do so, let alone pay the draconian fines that their wrongdoing provokes. There are, in fact, a small number of businesses that have suddenly closed up with the owners doing the disappearing act. Rumours abound on the circumstances that led to these situations and falling back in VAT payments is one of them. Apparently there were those who, short-sightedly, used money collected as VAT to tidy over ‘temporary’ cash flow problems that then became permanent! In these cases, the VAT department has neither collected the tax due to it nor the draconian fines as at law.
The argument that the state never intended to collect these draconian fines as they were only meant to be a deterrent is absolutely phony, especially considering the ones that ran away. These draconian fines cannot, in fact, be collected without bankrupting the businesses that can actually put their house in order and therefore they can never be actually imposed – as opposed to apparently imposed through a paper exercise that then leads to an ‘amnesty’! Where, therefore, is the deterrent when the imposition of such fines is simply an obvious game of bluff?
Threatening businesses to fine them a sum that could be even larger than their assets is vain and useless. The side effect of this ridiculous stance is that people might start to think that all fines – except those for parking in the wrong places and for stupidly speeding in front of cameras – can be pardoned. Wherever justified, fines should be credible, sensible and enforceable, not draconian. Will government now change this particular aspect of the VAT law and make it reasonable? I seriously doubt it.
This way of doing things exposes the limitations of the legislator: no state can enact laws that, in practice, cannot be enforced and in a democracy only good laws can be enforced. In an ideal world, law enforcement should be an exercise affecting a few miscreants. The police force can handle murders and robberies only because it is only a small part of the population that resorts to that kind of awful behaviour, while the big majority agrees that such deeds should not be tolerated. In this case, society not only agrees with and accepts the law, but even demands its enforcement.
Many other scenarios are not that simple. Forcing citizens to observe laws that the majority do not believe in is only possible through police state methods. A democratically elected government respecting the democratic rights of the citizens is always subject to limitations.
If, for example, a thousand people decide to hold open air barbecues at Għadira on one hot summer night – Mellieħa Local Council bylaws be damned – does the state get the army in to clear the beach? This is, of course, an absurd example but it goes on to show that in a democracy legislation must be acceptable, reasonable and enforceable and not draconian.
In the recent brouhaha on the proposed MEPA reform, we were told that enforcement is one of the pillars of this reform and that the state will be adopting a zero tolerance policy as regards buildings outside development zones. Both aims are genuine but both aims could fail miserably unless reason is the guiding principle behind them.
Beefing up MEPA’s enforcement efforts will never suffice if too many people start breaking the rules – a situation that can only be avoided if MEPA acts in a reasonable manner.
Whatever anybody says, this is a balancing act between the interests of the individual and that of the community and the genuine interests of the individual should never be summarily dismissed. Moreover too many conditions on a development permit create self-wrought headaches for MEPA’s enforcement section, apart from those wrought by people who do not bother to get a permit at all! Let alone the fact that MEPA’s enforcement section wastes a lot of precious time investigating petty reports and complaints on insignificant matters.
Even today, enforcement officers cannot concentrate on the infringements that matter as those who would have made the petty reports in the first place will accuse them of not doing their duty, even spicing their accusations with wild allegations of complicity with wrongdoers for ulterior motives.
Today MEPA already has a long list of enforcement cases waiting for ‘direct action’ – a list that is already too long to be tackled in a short time. Increasing this list will only expose the limitations that the state faces when imposing laws controlling illegal development. Saying that MEPA’s enforcement efforts will be improved is easy. Translating these words into action is not.
The other promise about zero tolerance in areas that are Outside Development Zones (ODZs) will even prove more difficult to deliver. The cases where development in these areas is justified can never be limited. Moreover even the Local Plans recognize that within these areas there are urban settlements that have their own development policies. Many hamlets – especially in the Rabat area, such as Mtaħleb, Kunċizzjoni, Andrijiet, and Santa Katerina – are strictly located in areas designated as ODZ. So do we freeze these localities and stop all possible development in them, irrespective of the needs of the residents?
This is yet another ‘law’ that cannot be really enforced. Somebody will soon start eating his words.
I admit that sometimes the fact that the legislator is trying to impose an unenforceable law is not always evident, but that makes it more important for the legislator to tread carefully rather than to rush headlong into commitments that the government of the day will not be able to uphold.
There is a vast chasm between theory and practice and the secret of the art of good government is to ensure proposing only what is possible and then acting decisively to pursue one’s decision rather than the art of managing perceptions, as some seem to think.
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Search:
MALTATODAY
BUSINESSTODAY
Download MaltaToday Sunday issue front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
This is nothing but an official admission that the collection of these fines contemplated by the VAT law cannot, in fact, be enforced! The bit about the waiving of the fines being subject to business falling in line is, of course, a meaningless face saver. Those who do not eventually ‘fall in line’ - because they have misspent moneys they collected on behalf of the government – cannot do so, let alone pay the draconian fines that their wrongdoing provokes. There are, in fact, a small number of businesses that have suddenly closed up with the owners doing the disappearing act. Rumours abound on the circumstances that led to these situations and falling back in VAT payments is one of them. Apparently there were those who, short-sightedly, used money collected as VAT to tidy over ‘temporary’ cash flow problems that then became permanent! In these cases, the VAT department has neither collected the tax due to it nor the draconian fines as at law.
