FOR a man who won popular support when he castigated the Irish government for its failure to spend our tax in the way that he saw fit, Bono now finds himself standing in a lonely place. Last week the rock-star-turned-campaigner was exposed for taking part in a decision that will deliberately reduce the amount of tax that he and his business partners in U2 will contribute from next year onwards.

Since June, the band and its manager have engaged in what is known as ‘tax avoidance’, moving U2’s publishing empire to the Netherlands where it can avail of a near zero rate of tax on royalties. It is absolutely legal, but it still jars. How can the music industry’s preacher-in-chief hope to retain his credibility when next he

delivers a sermon to governments on how they should spend their taxpayers’ money? This development is a bitter disappointment to those of us who have admired Bono’s campaigns on behalf of the world’s poorest. The U2 singer has taken the unprofitable, and often unpopular, course of demanding adequate healthcare provision for those afflicted with HIV and Aids, advocating the reduction of debt owed by impoverished countries to rich nations and promoting equitable global commercial trade.

It has been all too easy for some commentators to mock the bombast and posturing that often accompanies his public engagements, but I always admired the skill that Bono employed in marrying his idealistic intentions to the pragmatism demanded by those he dealt with in the world of politics and economics.

Not for Bono the futile tactics of the naive anti-globalisation lobby, who would make themselves (and nobody else) feel better by engaging in boycotts, rather than helping the needy through active engagement with the powerful. It is impossible not to be impressed by the energy with which the U2 frontman has pursued his objectives.

Not only does Bono agitate on the world stage, putting pressure on leaders such as George Bush, Tony Blair and Vladimir Putin in the full glare of the media spotlight, but he acts locally, too.

When U2 played Croke Park last summer Bono used his platform to assail Bertie Ahern, highlighting the government’s decision to renege on a commitment to deliver annually to the Third World a sum equivalent to 0.7% of our national income by 2007. The taoiseach had shifted the target to 2012 so the money could be spent domestically.

Bono provided his take on these events to an audience that might not otherwise have noticed this slippage and the crowds in Croke Park hollered their support. It seemed to have the desired effect. Already contributing more than €540m each year to relief efforts, Ahern promised that he would speed up efforts again to realise the 0.7% target sooner than 2012.

That money, of course, is ours since the only funds the government has are those it raises through various taxes. Bono — or Paul Hewson, as the taxman would know him — contributes to that pool, albeit not in the same proportion as you or I, given that he enjoys an income that is a multiple of that earned by pretty well everyone reading this paper.

All his annual Irish-sourced income is taxable as Bono remains resident in the country. Any trade in assets, such as property, would be liable to capital gains tax, and income from non-music related activities, such as dividends from his hotel investments, would also be taxed.

But a significant amount of his income is not liable for tax at all, irrespective of when and where it was earned.

Bono is a beneficiary of the tax exemption scheme for artists introduced in the 1960s. This tax break meant Bono did not need to follow the lead of other multi-millionaire Irish citizens who live elsewhere and limit the number of days they spend in this country each year so as to reduce their domestic tax bills.

Because Bono was one of the few members of Ireland’s super-rich club who could enjoy preferential status while still living at home this contributed to the jaundiced view that followed his lecture to Ahern. His critics believe he is compromised and therefore acting hypocritically. I disagree. Bono did not lobby to have these particular tax laws introduced and neither did he choose to leave the country in order to avoid paying tax on his non-royalty income.

Times Recommends

• Henning Mankell: ‘If Wallander was alive, I wouldn’t be a friend of his’
• Secret society's skull and crossbones for sale
• Nigerian leader vanishes after medical treatment