WITHIN wealth management circles it is known politely as tax efficiency. For those preferring to call a spade by its most recognisable name, it is legal tax avoidance.

Nobody likes paying tax. Anyone in the fortunate position of being able to minimise their tax bill legitimately tends to seize the opportunity. But the prosperous are on particularly familiar terms with these little conveniences in life. That's because they can afford top quality tax advice. And then offset the expert's bill against tax, too.

So it is up to governments to close off tax loopholes and knock the roofs off tax shelters. When a state is squeezing its citizens, tax leniency becomes not just inappropriate but improper. Allowing so many tax breaks to continue at a time of national crisis is antagonistic, repugnant and inconsistent with democracy.

No doubt the Government wishes to persuade workers, indignant about a them-and-us approach to sharing burdens, that industrial action is contrary to the country's best interests. It could start by stamping 'discontinued' across a range of tax write-offs.

It's astounding how your tax bill can be manipulated if you're sufficiently loaded -- wheezes range from relocating to a tax haven to investing in the horse racing industry. No wonder, as US hotel magnate Leona Helmsley contemptuously observed, only the little people pay taxes.

Such tax efficiencies are legal and accepted. But the time has come to adopt a policy of conspicuous intolerance towards these reliefs -- and eliminate the lion's share of them.

When the boom was getting "boomer" under the leadership of that fiscal mastermind Bertie Ahern, most of us turned a blind eye towards the myriad tax exemptions functioning here. After bailing out the banks, however, we have no stomach for the financial accommodations availed of by the great, the good and those who simply think themselves too important to pay up.

This week, thanks to a public-spirited reader, I learned about a legal tax avoidance scheme which I particularly resent. It involves Portmarnock Golf Club -- that fossilised bastion of male apartheid. Every member of Portmarnock Golf Club should hang his head in shame.

Their primitive attitudes to gender equality have sparked mystified and mocking headlines worldwide.

And now I understand the club has taken advantage of a legal tax avoidance scheme at a cost to the Exchequer of almost €1.8m. Money which could have been put to other uses was instead allowed to be hived off to upgrade its clubhouse.

The prestigious golf club, which numbers judges, politicians and senior business figures among its membership, doesn't strike me as an organisation in need of the taxpayer's mercy. But the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism thought differently, and granted its application. You have to wonder who lobbied on the golfers' behalf.

The Revenue Commissioners operate an arrangement called 'Tax Relief for Donation to Certain Sports Bodies', which allows people to donate funds to sporting organisations as a tax break.

Instead of paying tax on a sum of money, they can give it to their local GAA, tennis or soccer club to improve facilities, earning 41pc tax relief on the donation. Virtue is not just its own reward here. Not only does the benefactor legitimately lower his or her tax bill, the recipient is likelier to attract donations. A hole in one for both.

But all the favours fall to club and donor. The Exchequer is the poorer by it -- that's you and me, incidentally.

Of course, many organisations avail of this arrangement. I like to imagine it was devised to allow cash-strapped clubs with limited amenities to raise the standard of pitches and changing rooms, with a proportionate windfall to their local communities.

But it is a perversion of that vision to extend it to well-heeled clubs. Particularly when one of the beneficiaries, Portmarnock Golf Club, is among only two golf clubs in the State refusing to admit women as members. Taxpayers are subsidising state-condoned gender inequality.

The Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism approved Portmarnock for the scheme in 2004, allowing it to raise almost €1.8m in tax-exempt funding "for construction work on a new clubhouse development". And indeed, the club's website trills of those enhanced facilities.

Aside from the question of Portmarnock's primitive attitude to women, which is, after all, a question of taste -- or distaste -- I'm puzzled why such a flourishing club was awarded tax exemption. This is an elite organisation which never has to trawl for new members. People don't apply, they are invited to join -- usually on the basis of family associations.

But Portmarnock is not alone here. Some extraordinarily privileged clubs feature on the tax-relief list. It is nonsense to operate a policy whereby the taxpayer acts as their fairy godmother. Surely members should pay, in full, for their own improvements, without the need for tax concessions.

Finally, Portmarnock's ingrained sexism looks like costing us financially in another way. There is a real danger it may impact adversely on Ireland as a brand name in international golfing circles.

The Solheim Cup for women golfers is scheduled for 2011 in Killeen Castle, Co Meath.

This is an international biennial event which should, in theory, bring much-needed tourism to Ireland. But some will now feel they would prefer not to visit, and I can't say I blame them. Portmarnock has not just cost us tax revenue, it has been allowed to tarnish the entire country. Thanks a million (or several), chaps.

mdevlin@independent.ie

- Martina Devlin

Irish Independent