asked the Minister for Finance if he will consider removing VAT from transactions in restaurants and canteens in industrial undertakings, especially where the firms concerned are subsidising the workers' meals.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Removal of VAT.
65.
The removal of VAT from restaurants and canteens in industrial undertakings would put traders and consumers in other areas of catering at a disadvantage. I do not propose to change the present position.
Does the Minister not consider it is rather unfair to these firms who are subsidising these canteen facilities?
One of the most essential requirements of VAT is that people who are in a particular category, people who have a similar form of activity, should pay the same rate of tax. If, therefore, the concession which the Deputy seeks were to be given it would mean that catering firms who render similar services would be put at a serious disadvantage and the result would be serious unemployment in the catering industry.
I can see there are some difficulties. These canteens are confined to the employees of the firms concerned. The public would not be allowed to eat in them.
The Chair would prefer if the Deputy would ask a specific supplementary question.
I am asking: does the Minister not think he is being unjust to these firms?
No. It would be unjust to give them an advantage which was not available to other people in the catering industry.
The ordinary public would not be eating in these canteens and restaurants.
A very large number of industrial concerns and offices engage catering firms to provide meals for their employees. These catering firms are obliged to carry VAT. Accordingly, they would suffer if the Deputy's suggestion were adopted.
Then it is not really true to say that VAT has been removed from food?
It is true to say that VAT has been removed from food. It has not been removed from services in connection with food.
It is calculated at the same rate as if it were on food.
The net effect would probably be about 2p per week on any person if the concession to which the Deputy refers was given. The consequences would be most unfair. I do not think the Deputy would wish for that.
66.
asked the Minister for Finance if the removal of VAT from schoolbooks is under consideration.
67.
asked the Minister for Finance when it is intended to remove VAT from all educationally orientated books.
I propose, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 66 and 67 together. The question of the removal of VAT from books of an educational nature has been carefully considered. As it is not practicable in many cases to distinguish at the point of sale between educational and other books, relief for schoolbooks is not possible.
Arising from the Minister's reply, in view of a long philosophical dissertation by the Minister about essentials and non-essentials in relation to VAT, I wish to ask him if he regards schoolbooks as essential.
I regard schoolbooks as essential to school children but, as Deputy Colley said when he was Minister, it was not practicable to distinguish at the point of sale between what are schoolbooks and other books.
But I did not increase VAT on schoolbooks. The present Government imposed VAT on them.
Deputy Colley and his Government imposed 5.26 per cent. The tax which you say was there was one put on by the Deputy. If putting on 1.5 per cent is a heinous crime, what does the Deputy say about the tax he put on?
Order.
We did not increase the tax on schoolbooks.
Arising from the Minister's reply, in view of the fact that the Minister said that essentials would not be taxed, why is he putting this extra tax on schoolbooks?
The Government undertook to remove VAT from food.
From essentials.
From food. That is what we have done. We indicated that the revenue would be obtained elsewhere.
I am calling Deputy Tunney.
Would the Minister say would it be practicable to arrange with the publishers of schoolbooks that VAT should not apply? Personally, I would not see it as a very big problem.
How does one distinguish between the plays of Shakespeare when sold as schoolbooks or sold to an adult who requires them for his pleasure?
If a Shakespearean play is prescribed for a certain course, such as the intermediate certificate or the leaving certificate, VAT should not apply.
We cannot have a debate on this matter.
I have not troubled the Chair much.
The Deputy has put a number of supplementary questions on this matter.
Would the Minister not agree that VAT could be excluded from the range of books for which grants are available for needy children?
There are many areas of expenditure by the Government in relieving people in necessitous circumstances which carry VAT. If VAT were removed from a variety of these expenditures the number of anomalies would be multiplied. I would like to emphasise that the amount of expenditure arising from VAT on schoolbooks is probably about one five-hundredth part of the saving which we have been able to achieve by the removal of VAT from foodstuffs. Not by schoolbooks alone doth a child live.
What about food and clothing?
(Interruptions.)