Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Jun 1980

Vol. 322 No. 2

Finance Bill, 1980: Financial Resolution.

I move:

That, to the extent and in the circumstances specified in the Act giving effect to this Resolution, provision be made in that Act for the amendment of section 115 (2) of and Schedule 3 to the Income Tax Act, 1967, which provide for the reduction of the tax which would otherwise be chargeable under section 114 of the said Income Tax Act, 1967, on certain payments made in connection with the termination of the holding of an office or employment or any change in its functions or emoluments."

Would the Minister give us an explanation of this?

As the Deputies appreciate we will be dealing with this again on an amendment to section 10 of the Bill, which I understand will be recommitted.

The amendment will be re-committed when we reach it.

The resolution relates to an amendment being moved later in relation to section 10 concerning the treatment of golden handshake payments. Deputies will recall that I mentioned this on Committee Stage and said I would bring in an amendment on the Report Stage to deal with it. The resolution prepares the way for this amendment and the matter can be discussed in detail on the amendment. I should mention also that the amendment will provide that a person claiming relief for the first time will be entitled to receive £10,000 tax free. It will also provide that persons in receipt of very substantial golden handshakes will not be able to rearrange their affairs so as to largely avoid any tax payments. The matter will come up for detailed discussion during the course of the amendment.

We are in a difficulty because the amended Bill has not been circulated and neither has the list of amendments.

The Chair would like to inform the Deputy that that is due to our late finishing on the Bill yesterday. They are on their way from the printers for the past half hour and we have not received them yet. We can proceed with the first part of the Bill if the House agrees. The first five amendments are here.

I am not making any point about it but I cannot refer to or look at the amendments because I have nothing to look at in front of me.

I am in the same difficulty.

If this is an amendment to deal with the taxing of golden handshakes how is it the subject of a Financial Resolution?

Because it will propose to raise extra revenue in respect of these and for that reason it has to be the subject of a Financial Resolution.

Is it separate from the general tax resolutions which were passed?

Yes, because it does involve an amendment and a new tax as is appropriate. When we come to discussing it in detail on the amendment Deputies will find that a consequential provision will be in ease of a very considerable number of people while raising the exemption from £6,000 as I mentioned to £10,000.

We had better wait until we come to it.

Is the financial resolution agreed?

Provisionally.

I take it that this is going to make the position as far as golden handshakes are concerned more severe as regards their taxation than previously was the case.

We have gone through the procedures in these resolutions quite a bit. The question now being asked obviously is more appropriate to Committee Stage. The procedure on resolutions is quite clear. One can make one speech. It is not question and answer which the Deputy is now resorting to.

I will deal with it on the amendment.

The amendment will be re-committed and at that stage in Committee it will be very easy to tease it out.

As far as procedure is concerned, it is a bit of a cod to be discussing a resolution and passing it before we have clarification as to what it means. It might be more appropriate to pass a financial resolution of this sort at the end of Committee Stage or at the end of Report Stage when the amendment has been made. When one has had clarification, then one can have a net discussion on the principle rather than trying to accept the principle before you know even what it means. I do not blame the Minister for this situation because it is due probably to something contained in the procedure, but it is unfortunate that we cannot get this clarification from the Minister before agreeing to a principle.

If that is the only point to be clarified I will be able to reply. The Deputy will be aware that this has always been the procedure. It is in accordance not only with procedure but also with the financial regulations. In each case I have moved a number of resolutions, for instance before Committee Stage, and the criticism that the Deputy is making now would apply equally there. Subsequently we came to discussing them in detail on Committee Stage. It is not starting this year. That has always been the pattern.

The financial resolutions are always taken prior to the Bill.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share