asked the Minister for Finance the amount of wealth tax collected to date; the amount of assessed tax in arrears; and the estimated tax outstanding.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Revenue Receipt.
8.
The amount of wealth tax collected from its introduction to 31 October 1981 was £18,768,000.
The amount of assessed tax in arrears on 31 October 1981 is estimated at £600,000. As regards cases where assessments have not been made, these consist chiefly of cases where returns have not yet been delivered. In most cases payments on account have been made. It is not possible at this stage to state what additional amount is likely to be collected when these cases are finalised. If further cases come to light where wealth tax is payable, all such cases will be followed up and revenue requirements insisted on in full.
Since wealth tax returns were made by the individuals concerned they were self-assessments, unlike income tax which is assessed by the Revenue Commissioners. Individuals who thought themselves liable to wealth tax were required by law at the time to make assessments themselves. How can the Minister give us his estimate of the amount of wealth tax uncollected at this stage? If it was left to individuals to make returns, and many of them did not do so, how are the Revenue Commissioners in a position to estimate the amount of uncollected wealth tax?
The estimate I gave was of the amount of assessed tax in arrears. That relates to identified taxpayers who have not yet paid wealth tax. I did not give any estimate of the amount of tax that might be owed by people not yet identified.
Will the Minister not agree that a cloud still hangs over people who did not give returns of their taxable income in the years in question? Are we to assume that this law will continue to be enforced ad infinitum and that the people in question will continue to be liable to prosecution?
That is self-evident. It would be quite unfair to the people who paid wealth tax when that tax was in operation if others who, in defiance of the law in many cases failed to make returns, should by virtue of the passage of time be allowed to escape their liability. That is perfectly fair and I do not think the Deputy was suggesting anything to the contrary.
9.
asked the Minister for Finance the estimated amount of estate, legacy and succession duties which would have been payable since the abolition of duties had such duties not been abolished.
It is estimated that estate, legacy and succession duties would have yielded the following amounts in the years from 1976 to 1981, inclusive, if they had not been abolished in 1975 and had continued unchanged since then: 1976, £21 million; 1977, £26 million; 1978, £34 million; 1979, £44 million; 1980, £50 million; 1981, £55 million.
Of these receipts, only about 10 per cent would have been referable to legacy and succession duties.
Will the Minister indicate how those estimated amounts compare with actual receipts from the taxes that replaced them, namely, the capital acquisitions tax, the gifts tax and so on?
The Deputy will know from his experience of answering questions that that is an entirely separate question. If the Deputy wants the information he should put down a question.
Is the information in the Minister's brief?
No, but there is no reason it should be. It is an entirely separate question.
The Minister is happy it is not in his brief.
I will be delighted to give the information on the next appropriate occasion.