asked the Minister for Finance the cost of giving a rebate of tax to all couples whose claim, if they had taken court proceedings, would be similar to that of the Murphy couple, judgment of whose claim was given by the Supreme Court earlier this year.
Written Answers. - Tax Rebate.
12.
The question of a rebate of tax would arise in the case of persons who suffered tax by deduction under PAYE or who had already paid tax on foot of an assessment. In addition, however, there would be the question of the treatment of persons who had not paid the full tax liability for those years whether by inadequate deductions under PAYE or because assessments had not been made or, where they had been made, had not adequately covered the total income of the persons concerned.
If, therefore, the decision on nonaggregation of incomes of married couples were to apply for the two years 1978-79 and 1979-80 the years for which the Supreme Court held that Mr. and Mrs. Murphy were entitled to repayment, the cost to the Exchequer would be in the region of £44 million. If application of the decision were limited to cases of earned income, the cost would be about £35 million.
I might add that, if the terms of the majority decision of the Supreme Court were to be departed from, it is not clear why rebates of tax and the revised treatment should be given to taxpayers for the years 1978-79 and 1979-80 only. Indeed, one of the Judges of the Supreme Court held that the appropriate period was six years. Those who had suffered tax on the then existing basis for 1977-78 and earlier years would claim that they were equally entitled to like treatment for those earlier years. Depending upon how far back this favourable treatment were to be applied, the cost to the Exchequer could be well over £100 million.