Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

FIRST IT WAS THIS..........

 

Stop playing politics with GRA and pay your taxes – Sattaur tells HughesPDFPrintE-mail
Written by   
Friday, 03 August 2012 22:29
COMMISSIONER General of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA), Khurshid Sattaur, has rebuked Alliance for Change’s Executive Member and attorney- at- law Nigel Hughes, advising him to stop playing politics with the agency. “They must pay their taxes, and let the GRA get on with their business, and they get on with their politics,” Sattaur said.
He was responding to Hughes’ statement published in the Friday, August 3, 2012 edition of the Stabroek News, in which Hughes claimed that Sattaur had “made a decision to waive taxes for one taxpayer for sums in excess of $70M when other taxpayers of a different hue must suffer a different fate for the same taxes.”
Sattaur accused Hughes of trying to mislead the public by indicating that the GRA was treating some taxpayers differently than others.
“I think that is a very lame argument; Mr. Hughes has put out there, and we want to refute it very strongly,” Sattaur stated.
“The DIDCO matter was before the court, and the court granted a waiver. The GRA has no authority to grant such a waiver in the law,” he said.
Sattaur posited that Hughes could be honest with the general public and inform them that he knows that “by way of an Amendment made in 2003, our powers to waive interest were removed. It is now vested with the Minister of Finance, and five conditions apply. These conditions have to apply as required in the law for such waivers to be granted.”
Sattaur further explained that three of the conditions are: the taxpayer has to have suffered from a natural disaster or from a fire, and or he/she would have become an imbecile.
The Commissioner General questioned whether Hughes was seeking a waiver on any of those conditions, “but if he has any of those conditions applying to him, he can approach the Minister or the Court and ask for a waiver; it is not in my authority to grant the waiver.”
Sattaur was at a loss to understand the misleading allegations of unfairness made against him by Hughes, adding that it was very disheartening.
“He is the one who caused the publicity by making certain statements in the press…alleging certain unfairness on our part…the statements that were initially made are that once someone opposes the government, then the GRA is sent after them. That is not the case,” Sattaur categorically denied.
“That might have been the case 25 years ago, we do not operate in that manner any longer…we are not a politicised organisation, we are not an organisation that favours any one because of any affiliation to race or politics. And I am proud of that,” Sattaur declared.
According to public records, the GRA obtained two court judgments against Harvest Company Ltd for failure to remit PAYE and one judgment under the Value Added Tax Act.
The verdict by the Court stated that in October 2011, judgment was granted for the sum of $621,967.00 for the periods January- August 2010. In June, 2009, judgment was granted for the sum of $7,236,032.00 for the periods August 2005- December 2005, July 2006 - December 2006, and January 2007- December 2007.
In January, 2010 Section 44 Certificate was filed for the sum of $1,439,644.00 for the periods April 2007- July 2007 and December 2007; January- June, September and November 2008; January 2009, February 2009 and April- July 2009.
In October, 2011 a Writ of Summons was filed in the High Court to recover $4,429,450 for the periods January to December 2008, and July to December 2009 for PAYE.
In January, 2012, an Unless Order was granted giving the Company five days to file an Affidavit in Defence. On the same day, the company filed the said Affidavit denying that the PAYE in the sum of $1,203,727 was deducted. The matter was called on July 24 for preemptory trial and has been adjourned to September 17, 2012.
In an effort to recover the state’s revenue, on May 22, 2012, a Writ of Execution, along with instructions to levy, was filed to recover the outstanding PAYE judgment sums.
In June, 2012, the officers of the GRA sought to institute levy proceedings against the Company. Officers of the GRA informed the High Court marshals that the business operates at 176 Middle Street, Georgetownm but the marshals insisted that they must visit the registered address stated on the writ of execution.
Sidewalk CafÉ and Jazz Club is a registered business registered under the Business Registration Act and is solely owned by Harvest Company Ltd, a company incorporated under the Laws of Guyana with registered address at 62 Hadfield and Cross Streets, Georgetown.
When the officers of the Revenue Authority and the Marshals arrived at 62 Hadfield and Cross Streets, Werk-en-Rust, Georgetown, they were informed that the business is not being conducted at the registered address and has not been in operation for some years now. Hughes was out of the jurisdiction at the time
Subsequent to an article published in the Guyana Chronicle on Friday August 3, 2012, Hughes paid monies over to the GRA on the same day and then issued his statement of allegations against the Commissioner General of Revenue.

 

THEN HUGHES ADMITTED AT THE NCN CORRUPTION DEBATE THAT HE ONLY PAID US$25,000 IN TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2011. CAN YOU IMAGINE HUGHES BEING ONE OF THE MOST PROMINENT ATTORNEYS WITH A VERY LARGE CLIENTELE PAYING ONLY THIS PITTANCE.........

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Get him on his taxes if he did not pay. I is not a neglect I find corrupt just careless.

 

Neglecting to file formal reports on the handling of the nations holding company for the nations assets for over a decade is what I call corrupt.

FM
Originally Posted by albert:

FIRST IT WAS THIS..........

 

Stop playing politics with GRA and pay your taxes – Sattaur tells HughesPDFPrintE-mail
Written by   
Friday, 03 August 2012 22:29

He was responding to Hughes’ statement published in the Friday, August 3, 2012 edition of the Stabroek News, in which Hughes claimed that Sattaur had “made a decision to waive taxes for one taxpayer for sums in excess of $70M when other taxpayers of a different hue must suffer a different fate for the same taxes.”
Sattaur accused Hughes of trying to mislead the public by indicating that the GRA was treating some taxpayers differently than others.hronicle on Friday August 3, 2012, Hughes paid monies over to the GRA on the same day and then issued his statement of allegations against the Commissioner General of Revenue.

 

THEN HUGHES ADMITTED AT THE NCN CORRUPTION DEBATE THAT HE ONLY PAID US$25,000 IN TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2011. CAN YOU IMAGINE HUGHES BEING ONE OF THE MOST PROMINENT ATTORNEYS WITH A VERY LARGE CLIENTELE PAYING ONLY THIS PITTANCE.........

I don't understand the position taken by Mr Hughes.  Either he owes or does not own the tax.  Throwing other people into the brew does not change anything.  Furthermore, how does he know the details of another person's tax situation to benchmark with himself.  I agree with the GRA on this.

FM

CHAIRMAN of the Alliance for Change, Nigel Hughes, has come in for criticisms again after making a public disclosure that he only paid $5M in income taxes last year back into the public coffers.
Hughes made the comment after a member of the public allegedly upbraided him for his conduct and poor contributions during the fourth edition of the corruption debate series aired on National Communications Network on Sunday evening.
The member of the public had noted that Hughes was attempting to cast aspersions on all and sundry but did not necessarily expose his shortcomings with respect to paying his taxes.
“I paid $5M income tax last year and I challenge the Guyana Revenue Authority...I don’t get the government work”, he disclosed on the programme.
Already, scores of lawyers and other political commentators have said that they marvelled at the disclosure, arguing that this could not be the sum total of his income tax payments given the scope of his operations and the prominence of the cases that he provides defence services for.
“I would call on the Guyana Revenue Authority to launch an investigation into the authenticity of Hughes income tax payments...further I am convinced that something may be amiss here, and could provide insight into his disclosure”, a prominent legal luminary said after viewing the debates.
But the AFC Chairman further stated strongly that he was “not familiar with many lawyers that paid $5M in income taxes for last year or previous years”, after eyebrows first rose on the programme.
The comments came on the heels of revelations made by the Guyana Revenue Authority which accused one of Hughes businesses of tax evasion. The Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) obtained two judgments against Harvest Company Ltd, a company under the legal stewardship of the AFC Chairman for failure to remit PAYE and one judgment under Section 44 of the Value Added Tax Act No.10 of 2005.
Hughes had rushed to the media alleging discrimination and misrepresentation by the Guyana Revenue Authority, which he accused of singling him out for special treatment. He even accused the commissioner general of exposing his lack of independence and “overt enthusiasm to do his master’s bidding”. The Commissioner General, Khurshid Sattaur, had taken umbrage at statements by Hughes explaining that he was engaging in a publicity stunt, noting that the company has defaulted in remitting workers VAT and PAYE to enrich themselves.
He vowed that the GRA will not be intimidated by anyone as it seeks to carry out its lawful duties.
Noting that the GRA was a fully professional body, Sattaur flayed Hughes for accusing the entity of being politically-motivated in seeking to redeem the taxes his company defaulted on.
The GRA had obtained two judgments against Harvest Company Ltd for failure to remit PAYE; and one judgment, under Section 44 of the Value Added Tax Act, Number 10 of 2005. The particulars of the said judgments are as follows:
“On the 7th October, 2011 (Action Number 814/CD 2011), judgment was granted for the sum of $621,967 (being PAYE principal in the sum of $468,183, penalties in the sum of $106,814 and interest in the sum of $46,970) for the periods January to August 2010. On the 24th June, 2009 (Action Number 105/CD 2009), judgment was granted for the sum of $7,236,032 (being PAYE principal in the sum of $2,337,110.00, penalties in the sum of $2,692,231 and interest in the sum of $2,206,691) for the periods August 2005 to December 2005 to July 2006  to December 2006 and January 2007 to December 2007. On 7th January, 2010 Section 44 Certificate was filed for the sum of $1,439,644 (being VAT in the sum of $942,803 and interest thereon in the sum of $496,841) for the periods April 2007 to July 2007 and December 2007; January to June, September and November 2008; January 2009, February 2009 and April to July 2009.
“On 13th October, 2011 a writ of summons was filed in the High Court to recover $4,429,450 (being PAYE in the sum of $1,230,727 and interest and penalties thereon in the sum of $3,198,723) for the periods January to December 2008 and July to December 2009. On the 18th January, 2012 Justice Persaud granted an Unless Order, giving the company five days to file an affidavit in defence. On the same day, the company filed the said affidavit, denying that the PAYE in the sum of $1,203,727 was deducted. The matter was called on 24th July for pre-emptory trial and has been adjourned to 17th September, 2012.”


Excerpts from the Guyana Chronicle

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×