asked the Minister for Finance the estimated total revenue lost to the State by allowing tax relief on private house mortgages in the last financial year for which figures are available.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Revenue Loss on Tax Reliefs.
20.
Information is not available on which an accurate estimate could be based. However, the indications are that the cost to the Exchequer of allowing relief in respect of mortgage interest is currently of the order of £18 million.
Pensions, houses and health are private schemes. Is the subsidy of those private schemes not in contradistinction to the position taken up by the Minister's colleagues and himself that there should be a cutback in subsidies to public housing, health and social welfare pensions? There is no criticism by them that those schemes should be cut down. While some of the people benefiting from those schemes are white collar workers some of them are very wealthy people. The wealthier one is the more one benefits.
The Deputy will be aware that the great bulk of the people who are benefiting under this are in the broad category of white collar workers, as he said, but the question of the amount of subsidy that should be paid on public housing is another matter and has to be considered in the overall context of the fiscal management of our economy. I am sure the Deputy will also be aware that the amount of subsidy on public housing, both in absolute overall terms and in relation to each unit of housing is quite substantial and certainly very much more substantial than applies in the case of private housing.
How much of that tax relief was in respect of mortgages in excess of £30,000? Has the Minister any figures for that?
I do not have that information available. The Deputy will be aware that there is an overall limit in regard to the allowance of mortgage interest for any purpose, whether it includes house purchase or anything else, of £2,000.
How many beneficiaries are there?
I do not have any figures. As I indicated in the reply this is not an accurate estimate. It is simply giving an indication of the order of magnitude. We do not have information which would enable us to make an accurate estimate.
Is there not a record of how many people are claiming this?
As I indicated a claim may be made up to a limit of £2,000 on mortgage interest on a house and on other interest. The claim is made in a person's tax return and will include both. We do not segregate them.
Would the Minister not have a figure for all claiming interest?
I think it would probably be possible to get this.
Does the Minister think that this is the kind of subsidy which should be cut like food subsidies?
Does the Deputy think so?
Has the Minister any intention of doing this?
I have not indicated any intention in that regard.
21.
asked the Minister for Finance the estimated tax revenue lost to the State by allowing tax relief on payments to pension schemes in the last financial year for which figures are available.
Statistics are not recorded in such a manner as to enable the information requested by the Deputy to be given accurately.
However, very tenative estimation suggests that the total cost of tax relief allowed in respect of pension schemes —including social welfare pensions— could be of the order of some £60 million a year.
Does the Minister have the figure for the number of beneficiaries?
No.
Could the Minister get it?
If the Deputy puts down a question I will see if I can.
22.
asked the Minister for Finance the estimated total tax revenue lost to the State by allowing tax relief on payments to the Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme for the last financial year for which figures are available.
The cost of allowing tax relief under section 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1967, in respect of medical insurance premiums is estimated at £4 million in a full year.
May I take it that there is a total of about £82 million being paid in subsidies to those private schemes?
I have given the Deputy the figures.