Winebox Inquiry

The inquiry was characterized by extensive litigation, both during and afterwards and by an extremely high level of public interest.

The box contained numerous documents relating to a range of transactions entered into or contemplated by a number of parties.

In 1992, New Zealand politician Winston Peters made repeated claims in Parliament of criminality associated with tax planning undertaken by some of New Zealand’s largest companies (some involving tax deals with the Cook Islands) as well as fraud and incompetence by both the Inland Revenue Department and the Serious Fraud Office.

The terms of reference of the Commission of Inquiry required it to report upon whether the Inland Revenue Department and the Serious Fraud Office had acted in a lawful, proper and competent manner in dealing with the transactions under investigation, and to examine whether any changes to the criminal or tax laws should be made to protect New Zealand's income tax base from the effects of fraud, evasion and avoidance.

The Law Commission identified[1] four court cases which arose during or immediately after the inquiry; this indicates the degree of litigation and controversy surrounding it.

Most notable of these was a case for judicial review initiated by Winston Peters against the Commissioner, which effectively resulted in an upholding of Davison’s findings.