Vol. 432 No. 3
18 Mr. McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the method by which the Revenue Commissioners satisfy themselves that there is a reasonable public access to buildings in respect of which tax relief is granted under section 19 of the Finance Act, 1982; if consultation takes place with members of the public in the locality on this matter; and the approximate amount of tax foregone under this section since 1982.
19 Mr. McCormack asked the Minister for Finance the method by which the Revenue Commissioners satisfy themselves that there is reasonable public access to buildings in respect of which tax relief is granted under section 19 of the Finance Act, 1982; if consultation takes place with members of the public in the locality on this matter; and the approximate amount of tax foregone under this section since 1982.
22 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Finance the method by which the Revenue Commissioners satisfy themselves that there is reasonable public access to buildings in respect of which tax relief is granted under section 19 of the Finance Act, 1982; if consultation takes place with members of the public in the locality on this matter; and the approximate amount of tax foregone under this section since 1982.
24 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Finance the method by which the Revenue Commissioners satisfy themselves that there is reasonable public access to buildings in respect of which tax relief is granted under section 19 of the Finance Act, 1982; if consultation takes place with members of the public in the locality on this matter; and the approximate amount of tax foregone under this section since 1982.
25 Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for Finance the method by which the Revenue Commissioners satisfy themselves that there is reasonable public access to buildings in respect of which tax relief is granted under section 19 of the Finance Act, 1982; if consultation takes place with members of the public in the locality on this matter; and the approximate amount of tax foregone under this section since 1982.
42 Mr. McGahon asked the Minister for Finance the method by which the Revenue Commissioners satisfy themselves that there is reasonable public access to buildings in respect of which tax relief is granted under section 19 of the Finance Act, 1982; if consultation takes place with members of the public in the locality on this matter; and the approximate amount of tax foregone under this section since 1982.
It is proposed to take Questions Nos. 18, 19, 22, 24, 25 and 42 together. An applicant for a determination under section 19 of the Finance Act, 1982 must give full details of the access afforded to the public including: (i) the parts of the building to which access is available; (ii) the times and periods of such cases.
The Revenue Commissioners also require evidence that the general public is aware of the access to the building. Such evidence would include notices in brochures or publicity leaflets issued by Bord Fáilte or other similar organisations and advertisements in local or national newspapers. Evidence is required at the stage of granting the relief and can also be requested on an ongoing basis in order to establish that access continues to be afforded to the general public.
The Revenue Commissioners do not consider that consultations with members of the public in the localities in which the buildings are situated is necessry in view of the procedures in operation. In any event, given their obligations in regard to confidentiality attached to the tax affairs of the owner-occupiers, the Revenue Commissioners would be precluded from engaging in such consultations.
Statistics are not available which would enable a precise estimate of the cost of the relief to be given. However, it is broadly estimated that the cost in terms of income tax and corporation tax foregone has not exceeded £0.2 million in any year since its introduction.
How many buildings approximately qualify for this relief?
At present, I do not have the figure.
I believe the relief has been extended to gardens.
Relief under this section applies to buildings normally approved by the Commissioners of Public Works, that is a building which is intrinsically of significant scientific, historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest and that reasonable access is afforded to the general public. As the amount of tax foregone does not exceed £200,000, a huge number is not involved.
Does the Minister agree that it is desirable that vernacular as well as formal architecture is preserved? Does he agree that the dwellings of ordinary people, old cottages and old farm buildings, should be preserved and should qualify for relief under this section?
Will the Minister inquire about the total number of people who qualify under this section and establish the number in each category, whether scientific, architectural or historical?
I will certainly send a note on this matter to the Deputy. Under this section, 72 buildings have been acquired in the past ten years.
Is that all?
The Deputy will recall that in the budget this year we linked houses with gardens. There had been an anomaly whereby gardens were included only if the building was historic. Relief has been extended to about ten gardens. I shall supply the data on the actual breakdown between scientific and historical architecture to the Deputy.
A final supplementary, please.
Would the Minister agree that if only great houses qualify and small dwellings do not qualify for this relief then we are having a sort of retrospective class consciousness that all to this legislation? It is important that all types of dwelling should be preserved because all are of intrinsic historical interest. Would he agree to publicise this relief in such a fashion as to ensure that all types of dwelling and building are preserved and not simply those that happen to have been stately homes?
I have no objection to complying with that request. Under the urban renewal scheme and some other reliefs, relief has been applied for some Georgian houses but it is under a different category. I agree to highlight the date available.
We must move now to Private Notice Questions.
