After hours of interrogation on the third day of the interrogations about the benefits affair, two former directors of the Tax and Customs Administration acknowledged that they had made mistakes, but in their eyes the harshness of the tax authorities was mainly caused by others.
Peter Veld, Director-General of the Tax Authorities between 2010 and 2015, and Gerard Blankestijn, Director of Benefits at the Tax Authorities between 2011 and 2018, were in high positions at the Tax Authorities when the fraud hunt was set up and eventually derailed completely.
They saw things go wrong, raised the alarm with their bosses, but when further action was not taken to change anything, there was no follow-up.
“I had a feeling of powerlessness,” said Blankestijn. Field: “I felt uncomfortable about the rules. They were too strict.”
The law stipulated that if an error was made in the application for childcare allowance, the total amount paid had to be reimbursed. This could mean that a calculation error of 100 euros resulted in a bill of 30,000 euros.
Civil servants also blame Social Affairs
Both expressed their concerns. When Blankestijn noticed after a number of attempts in 2015 that nothing would change, he stopped. “I should have continued with that,” he says now.
Blankestijn and Veld met with reluctance in particular at the Ministry of Social Affairs. After all, that is where the policy for childcare allowance is determined. The Ministry of Finance, which includes the Tax and Customs Administration, was solely responsible for the implementation and detection of fraud.
“If the Tax Authorities had listened then, we would not have had these problems now,” said Veld. He called Social Affairs’ stance “obstinate”. State secretaries Frans Weekers (until 2014) and Eric Wiebes (2014 – 2017) were also prepared to amend the law, according to officials.
The context also had to be understood, the former directors thought. When the fraud hunt was launched, there was broad political and social support for it due to the Bulgarians fraud that came to light in 2013.
The tax authorities were defrauded by the Bulgarians for millions through the surcharges. In the Netherlands, the House of Representatives then called for tough action. “The pressure was huge,” Blankestijn recalled.
Answers did not provide clarity
In the spring of 2017, there were enough reasons to change course: the Tax and Customs Administration lost an important lawsuit at the Council of State, the National Ombudsman issued a critical report and an internal advice was issued (memo) calling for policy changes. Nevertheless, the tax authorities continued to stick to the hard line afterwards.
“You felt powerlessness. Why didn’t you take that moment to change something?”, A visibly irritated Attje Kuiken (PvdA) asked Blankestijn.
His answers did not necessarily provide more clarity. For example, Blankestijn found that he had indeed followed up on the internal report of Sandra Palmen, a high-ranking lawyer at the tax authorities, because her advice was more or less also in the report of the National Ombudsman and they have been taken to heart.
The image is correct that Palmen’s advice disappeared into a drawer without anything happening to it. Even more remarkable: it remained there despite multiple committees, journalists and MPs asking for it.
“People have been looking badly”, Blankestijn said about it. It would simply lie with other reports that were neatly stored.
According to Blankestijn, the decision of the Council of State has been complied with by the tax authorities. That remained a point of discussion between him and the committee members.
Accident or mortal sin?
After the decision of the Council of State, a conversation followed between the Tax and Customs Administration and Eva González Pérez, the lawyer of dozens of duped parents, with the intention of finding a solution together.
The lectures also differ on that. González Pérez appeared before the committee on Monday and stated there that she was “facing a wall of denial” during that conversation. “A senior lawyer from the tax authorities walked away stamping his feet.”
González Pérez was in court with an incomplete file, she later discovered. The tax authorities were accused of withholding documents from court. “A mortal sin,” said González Pérez. “An accident”, said Blankestijn.
It was yet another example that (former) senior officials of the Tax and Customs Administration have a completely different experience of the benefits affair than the duped parents.
Or as committee chairman Chris van Dam (CDA) eventually put it: “I have the impression that as a pilot you have looked at the gauges in the cockpit, but not at the people.”
– .
