Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 11 Dec 1951

Vol. 128 No. 5

Ratification of Conventions—Statement by Minister for Finance.

Following discussions which were initiated some years previously, two double taxations conventions with the Government of the United States of America were signed on 13th September, 1949. One of these conventions related to double estate tax, while the other was concerned with double income tax. Somewhat prematurely perhaps in view of the powers of the United States Senate, both were scheduled to the Finance Act, 1950, and, because of that, I think it desirable to inform the Dáil of developments which have since taken place.

With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States to ratification, the President of the United States transmitted the conventions to the Senate. The United States Senate has approved a resolution advising and consenting to the ratification of the convention with respect to estate tax without reservation. As regards the double income-tax convention, however, the position is somewhat different. The United States Senate has approved a resolution recommending the ratification of that convention, subject to reservations and these reservations amount to the elimination of two articles, videlicet, Articles 14 and 16. Article 14 relates to the exemption of residents of Ireland from the United States tax on capital gains and Article 16 relates to the exemption of Irish corporations from the United States tax on accumulated or undistributed profits.

The matter has been considered and we do not think the issues involved in the deletion of these articles which relate to the American tax law are of sufficient material importance to prevent us from ratifying the convention with the deletions and securing its benefits for our residents in this year. It is proposed accordingly to ratify the double income-tax convention, subject to the elimination of the articles to which I have referred, videlicet Articles 14 and 16, and I assume that there will be no objection to that course.

Could the Minister explain as from what date will the estate duty reciprocity take effect— deaths on or after what date?

If we are in a position to ratify in the course of the present calendar year, they will be related to the current year only.

Will they date back to the date of the Finance Act or merely from the ratification to be made in the future?

The date of ratification by ourselves and the United States Senate.

The Minister has said that he supposes there will be no objection to ratification. We have not had any details of this matter put before us. Is it necessary for the Minister to get a statement on that matter now or would he wait until to-morrow until we can have some consultation on it?

The position, as I am advised, is that since the date of tax exemptions relates entirely to American law, are not under our control and are not unusual—I should like to emphasise that—and both reservations to which I have referred have already been made in respect of other taxation agreements, I would assume that the Dáil would have no objection. It is a matter of some urgency, as, if we delay it overlong, it may happen that our nationals will be deprived of the major benefits arising out of the double taxation agreement. That is the reason for the urgency.

Could it not wait until to-morrow?

The point is that there is nothing in fact before the House except the Minister's statement.

The position is that I do not really require any statement or any resolution from the House. I am merely informing the House of the position which has arisen because of the fact that the two agreements were scheduled to the Finance Act, 1950. That is why I feel it right that the House should be informed of the position. I am advised that we do not require any formal resolution from the House, but I thought it advisable to mention the matter to the House.

I want to get clear on this, in view of the way the Minister has put it. The Minister is now advising the House of what the situation is and of his intention with regard to it, in view of the fact that there is nothing else he can do about it. Taking it that he is merely making a statement to the House, there is no point in our raising anything with regard to it. I appreciate the Minister's statement and if there is anything we have to convey to the Minister on the matter, we will convey it to him not later than to-morrow.

Is the position not that this is not alterable at this stage, unless we revoke the entire convention?

Unless we revoke the entire convention.

Top
Share