asked the Minister for Social Welfare the amount of finance/ contributions paid by the self employed to date; the number by category involved; the estimated number and finance outstanding; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
21.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Schedule D Tax Yield.
5.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the amount of money which was collected to date from (a) farmers and (b) self-employed in PRSI; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 and 21 together.
Estimated social insurance fund receipts in 1988 from the self employed were £22 million, made up of £16 million contributed by farmers and other Schedule D taxpayers, estimated to number 180,000 and £6 million contributed by proprietary directors who pay tax through the PAYE system, estimated to number 40,000.
In all, receipts from the self employed in 1988 were £7 million greater than originally estimated. The substantial improvement on the original estimate is attributable, in the main, to the success of the new self assessment tax system and the fact that incomes were higher than estimated.
Detailed information on the number of contributors by category, the number yet to contribute and the finance outstanding will not be available until a complete analysis of returns is undertaken by the Revenue Commissioners later this year.
How would the Minister propose to deal with a situation where a substantial number of people in the self-employed category have not paid and will not pay? What plans have his Department to deal with that?
Any of the people who are within the tax net, including farm profiles and any other section now, are known and will be paying. I am not aware of any one in that area saying, "I am not going to pay" because such people would have to say they are not paying their tax anyway. The question of people who are not known at this stage is something we will have to continue to pursue. We have done a fairly substantial advertising campaign to make sure everyone is aware of the benefits of involvement in the scheme and we hope to continue to bring in further numbers of people. The income is up almost 50 per cent on the anticipation for the year 1988 and for 1989 it is now estimated to be some £39 million.
Is the Minister satisfied that the forecast he made when we discussed this last year has now been met? If not, what plans has he in hand to initiate a campaign to bring in 100 per cent? It would appear to us that 100 per cent is not achievable. In the circumstances what plans has he in his Department to deal with any shortfall that may occur?
When we began this scheme last year it was felt we were being over optimistic about the money we would get. We now know we got nearly 50 per cent more than estimated, and in estimating for next year we can rely on a greater income than would have been predicted earlier. I assure the Deputy that I will continue my efforts to ensure everybody is included. Up to this stage it has been a question of trying to identify people. We have brought our information out round the country to various places and it has been appreciated greatly. Some social welfare information people have gone out and given lectures to farmers and other groups and there has been a good response to that once it was understood. We will keep up our efforts to bring everybody into the scheme.
I ask——
I will call the Deputy again. I am now calling Deputy Jim O'Keeffe.
In the light of additional finance to hand under this scheme, has the Minister given any further consideration to the anomalous position of those who are forced to pay into the scheme and yet cannot expect ever to get a pension? I am speaking of those who are over the age of 56 who are now forced to pay PRSI and under the existing regulation cannot hope to get a pension. Some of them will be paying for eight or nine years.
The Deputy is injecting new matter into this.
I think there is a separate question somewhere on it. I have had that matter examined and I will continue with the examination of it. It is really a question of cost at the end of the day. There are other questions, for instance, people come in and do not reach the full number of years. They are qualified for widow's and orphan's benefits——
After three years.
After three years, or if they have previous stamps it will be sooner. The problem is cost. The cost is very great——
How big is it?
——as you go up. I think there is another question on it.
Has the Minister any plans to link up with his colleague, the Minister for Health, in relation to those people who default on payment so that they will not be able to achieve the full benefits on the health end while they default on their contribution to the system?
One of the changes which went through last year is the combined collection of health, PRSI and tax, and that will be very effective. In fact, it is already having an effect. It will also facilitate greatly the pursuit of people through the courts because you can take three in one, so to speak. Previously we had to go separately and the amounts we would be looking for might be very small compared with what the Revenue Commissioners would be seeking on the tax side. Consequently, our side or the health side would be left way behind. Now they will all be dealt with as one and that will greatly increase the efficiency of that collection.
I want to make some worthwhile progress on other questions and I am sure I will have your co-operation. Up to now progress has been rather slow.