If Juncker must go, then so do Greece΄s finance minister and top tax collector

In an editorial published on November 9 Bloomberg said:  
 
“The Commission was already conducting an investigation of Luxembourg's tax arrangements. Juncker says he won't interfere — but he won't recuse himself, either. Indeed, his spokesman says he is “serene” in the face of the revelations. He shouldn't be. At this point, he could best serve the European project by resigning”.
 
The US financial news agency justifies its call saying that “Juncker's position as the head of the body investigating the tax practices he oversaw as prime minister is a clear conflict of interest”.
 
So let’s substitute Juncker’s name with those of Mr Hardouvelis or Ms Savvaidou. The Greek finance minister, who is in charge of the body that should be investigating this huge case of tax avoidance, prior to his appointment as a minister, had worked for many years in senior positions at his former employer (the EFG Group, the parent company of Eurobank) which is implicated in the LuxLeaks case.

The potential conflicts of interest were already highlighted even before the LuxLeaks broke out. In an op-ed Yanis Varoufakis argued back in June 2014: “The new Finance Minister, Gikas Hardouvelis, must either accept that he worked against the interest of the state when he was an adviser to Eurobank, or he is unfit to be Finance Minister”.

Like Juncker, Hardouvelis is both investigator and investigated, and for this reason, following the syllogism of Bloomberg, he should resign.
 
Ms Savvaidou is an even more difficult case, as she was a senior official ranking official at the company that set up the ‘tax relief’ system while she was on the finance ministry’s advisory council(link in Greek). In other words she was a representative of those audited and an auditor at the same time.
 
Like Juncker, her case is a clear conflict of interest. Her resignation is not just a matter of principle but also a matter of public interest. The question whether she knew of, or participated in, the deals made between PwC and Luxembourg authorities, which possibly cost the Greek state hundreds of millions of euros in lost revenues, is something that must be investigated. How can an investigation be conducted properly if the one under examination is the examiner.
 
But whoever said there is even an intention to investigate?
 
And this is where the difference with Juncker lies.
 
Mr Juncker at least had the courage to request not be left out of the investigation. Mr Hardouvelis and Ms Savvaidou did not do the same.
 
It’s already been a week since the case broke and the Greek authorities have not said a word while, at the same time, investigations have been launched and there have been reactions around the world – from Juncker to Australia’s tax commissioner (Ms Savvaidou’s counterpart).
 
The problem moves beyond a (very serious) conflict of interests. Even if they had no involvement in the case, it is surprising that they have not commented on a case implicating controversial (and possibly illegal) taxation practices of the biggest Greek or Greece-related companies.
 
In the past few years, the crack down on tax evasion was elevated by the likes of Hardouvelis and Savvaidou to a national cause. All Greeks that did not have the immunity enjoyed by Coca-Cola, the Latsis Group, Wind or various funds that supposedly ‘invest” in Greece, were presumed guilty as cheaters, fraudsters and tax evaders. Now, the same people that hunted down plumbers, hair-dressers and tavern owners behave – with the backing of the media (link in Greek) resembling a totalitarian regime –  as if the LuxLeaks tax avoidance scandal never broke as a story.
 
So, along with Anastasia Sakellariou who is the president of the Financial Stability Facility and under prosecution for a felony, Greece has the unique privilege of having in the most key positions of financial governance three ‘wolves’ to guard the wolves.