asked the Minister for Finance the arrangements made within his Department to check the register of employers to ensure that moneys being deducted under the PAYE system are being paid to the Revenue Commissioners without delay.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - PAYE System.
10.
(Clare): It is assumed that the Deputy's question relates to the procedures adopted by the Revenue Commissioners for the collection from employers of tax and contributions under the PAYE/PRSI system. I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the scheme of collection is organised so that employers make a declaration every month of the amount due under the PAYE scheme and remit that amount to the Revenue. At the end of the tax year the employer then sends in a detailed return showing the pay, income tax deducted and PRSI contributions, which is then audited and balanced with the monthly remittances. The register is so organised that forms of declaration are sent out in time for the monthly returns and at the end of the year. Any failure to send in the forms is followed up by the Revenue by way either of an estimation procedure or by proceedings in the courts.
While I accept what the Minister is saying as the official position, the factual position is——
A question, Deputy.
Is the Minister fo State aware that the factual position is that a number of firms have not paid their PAYE and, therefore, people who are claiming a refund of tax find that the money has not been paid on their behalf to the Revenue Commissioners? I have brought a couple of cases to the attention of the Revenue Commissioners. The people I am concerned about are ordinary hard-working people and they are being deprived of their refund of tax. What action is being taken? The information has been left in the Revenue Commissioners' office long enough to have a decision taken on it.
(Clare): At the end of the year the true position can be assessed, but under the system, as I have stated, that is the way the Revenue Commissioners have operated the system and have been doing so on a monthly basis. In the case of any failure to give a return they allow up to nine days to the end of the month and then they go after the firm or firms with regard to not submitting the returns.
Is the Minister for State aware that there is a very widespread feeling which has been reported to me from several quarters, as I am sure is the case with other Deputies also, that the Revenue Commissioners, whether because of lack of staff or softness of heart, allow a large number of firms to remain in very substantial arrears with their PAYE and VAT payments in order that these firms may use that money in place of the cash flow which they have not got out of their own resources, and that if they were to move in any more rigorously than they do they would be forcing a large number of firms to the wall and that that is an index of the position to which the country has been reduced?
(Clare): I agree that what would appear to be undue delay has taken place with regard to instituting proceedings to collect this money. I have met that myself, and I agree that they could be a little more on the ball with regard to proceedings where moneys are being withheld.
Is the Minister of State aware that the reply he has given relates to the returns being made and not to the Revenue Commissioners checking the employers' register as against the returns they are making? In other words, is he aware that it is possible for the returns to understate the amount deducted from employees' salaries? If he is so aware, would he take steps, for example spot checks, to ensure that the amounts being deducted from employees are paid over?
(Clare): As I pointed out in my reply, there is also a yearly return, P.35, which I understand can reveal whether there has been a shortfall returned during the year.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Arising out of the statement that there is what would appear to be undue delay on the part of the Revenue Commissioners in collecting PAYE and PRSI, would the Minister of State agree that this delay is practised with the approval or even benediction of the Government? If that is so, it would appear to be a most unorthodox way of financing returns and one which would inevitably lead to trouble.
(Clare): I am not aware that it is practised with the authority of the Government. When trouble hits a particular firm it comes to light eventually that it has happened.
Question No. 11.
(Interruptions.)
(Cavan-Monaghan): Would it not be better to assist them in some other way, perhaps by way of grant through the IDA, rather than permit them to withhold these payments and then follow them for large sums later on?
Can I ask——
No. Ceist 11. We are down to only Question No. 11, and look at the time.
You are discriminating against me.
I am not discriminating against anyone.