Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 8 Dec 2011

Vol. 749 No. 2

Topical Issue Debate

Tax Code

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dowd. The appearances of the French President, Mr. Sarkozy, and the German Chancellor, Mrs. Merkel, in the past few months have become more frequent. Each time they appear on the plinth in Berlin and Paris there is a certain hope the crisis in Europe will abate and we will have a resolution, but, unfortunately, that has not happened to date. Today we have reached a crescendo and there is almost a feeling that the gun is being put to our heads. There are shades of the night of the bank guarantee in 2008 and we believe we are being gang-whipped into accepting something we may regret in the future.

There are two main issues to be raised. I note that the President of the European Commission, Mr. Barroso, has stated today that we should approach the impending summit with an attitude of what we can do for Europe, rather than what we cannot do. It is very important that each country, Ireland included, should protect its self-interests. I will refer briefly to our corporation tax policy. I am delighted that the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade gave a commitment on that issue today, as the Taoiseach has also done. I wish the Taoiseach and his team well at the summit in Brussels. It is vital that we protect our corporation tax rate and under no circumstances should we compromise on the issue. It is equally important that we do not compromise on the common consolidated corporate tax base, on which we agreed to enter consultations. That is understandable, as it is important that it be placed on the table, but it is equally important that we do not compromise on the policy.

Before the implementation of the Lisbon treaty, the French President attended the French Embassy — I was present on the occasion — and the first issue he raised, as head of the country which held the EU Presidency at the time, was the responsibility of each country for its own tax policy, with which he said he had no intention of interfering, which is as it should be. It is not necessary for fiscal discipline purposes to have a harmonised tax policy. However, since the passing of the Lisbon treaty in a second referendum, particularly in the past 12 months, President Sarkozy has been very disingenuous and keeps placing the issue in the ether. This is not helpful to us as it causes uncertainty in multinational companies. It is within President Sarkozy's power to reduce the French corporation tax rate to match that of Ireland if he so wishes, but I ask him to keep his hands off our tax policy and urge the Taoiseach and the Government to ensure our policies in these two areas are not changed.

Two proposals have been brought forward at the summit, one being the Von Rompuy proposal to use one of the protocols to the Lisbon treaty to put measures in place to assist the achievement of discipline. There is pressure from France and Germany to go one step further and implement a new treaty, which may end up being the case. If it comes to pass, we must use a bargaining tool in our self-interests to gain a change in policy on our debt such as a write-down or a change in the interest rate being charged. It only stands to reason we should do this, as fighting another referendum campaign would prove very difficult.

Although people speak about losing sovereignty, the measures recommended by the IMF and the troika should have been implemented in this country long ago. Many broadly welcome such measures. Since the foundation of the State we have shown that we cannot manage our own monetary matters, particularly or even exclusively under Fianna Fáil-led Governments.

I thank the Deputy for raising this very important matter which I am taking in the absence of the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, who is unavoidably absent.

I will begin by outlining the background to our 12.5% corporation tax rate and its importance to Ireland. I will then outline the background to the common consolidated corporate tax base, CCCTB, proposal before differentiating between the proposal for a CCCTB and the corporation tax rate issue in the context of recent developments.

Since the 1950s Ireland has used its corporation tax strategy to encourage the growth of domestic business and attract foreign direct investment. The 12.5% corporation tax rate is critical to supporting our economic recovery and employment growth. Any move towards converging or harmonising the rates of company tax would substantially damage Ireland's ability to attract foreign direct investment and hence our ability to grow our way to economic recovery. Furthermore, certainty is a key element desired by investors and abandoning the commitment to the 12.5% rate would be seen as a major change in policy. It is central to our industrial policy and an integral part of our international brand. The commitment to the 12.5% rate was restated in the Minister's Budget Statement when he made it clear that there would be no change. This reiterates most of the comments made by the Deputy.

Members will be aware that the proposal for a CCCTB was published on 16 March. A CCCTB would essentially introduce new common rules for calculating company taxation across the European Union and replace the universally accepted separate accounting with arm's length pricing method for allocating group profits across borders with a sharing mechanism under a system known as formulary apportionment. The Commission argues that a directive is needed to tackle tax obstacles that are barriers to the completion of the Single Market and which place additional costs on businesses which trade across borders. It is worth reiterating that the explanatory memorandum to the CCCTB proposal specifically states there is no intention to extend harmonisation to tax rates and that each member state will be applying its own rate to its share of the tax base.

Ireland's position on the CCCTB is that we remain sceptical of the proposal, but we are constructively engaging in the policy and technical debate. We are not alone among member states that are sceptical about the proposal, but all member states are participating in the technical debate. As has been stated on a number of occasions, despite our scepticism about the merits of the proposal, the Government's view is that it is vital that Ireland is represented in the debate as only by actively engaging in the process can we ensure we will bring all issues of concern to the table. Our approach to translating constructive engagement into practice has involved a number of different aspects. First, the Department of Finance and the Revenue Commissioners are examining the Commission's proposal to assess the potential impact not only on the Exchequer position, but also on whether it is rigorous enough to stand up to the requirements of a modern tax system. Second, we are engaging in the EU Council working party on tax questions. The third element of our approach is to engage with Irish business representatives and our EU partners on the dossier to examine how they feel the proposal may impact on them. Engagement with our EU partners allows us to build a pan-European picture of the potential impact of the current proposal and areas where there may be some difficulties. This last step will be vitally important prior to and during the Irish Presidency of the European Council from 1 January 2013.

Members will be aware that a Dáil select committee examined the issue in May and following its examination, the committee determined that the CCCTB was in breach of the principle of subsidiarity. Nine member states with a total of 13 votes voted that the CCCTB breached the principle of subsidiarity. This, however, fell short of the treaty requirement for 18 votes which would have forced the Commission to re-examine whether the CCCTB was in conformity with the principle of subsidiarity. The Vice President of the European Commission responded to the reasoned opinion of Dáil Eireann on 20 October last. That response is available to all Members.

I was always supportive of Europe and this country's involvement in Europe. We spoke about a two-tier Europe in the past but I am concerned that it is becoming a three-tier Europe of the EU, the eurozone and within the eurozone, France and Germany.

I note in the Minister's response that in a further letter this week to President Van Rompuy, Mrs. Merkel and Mr. Sarkozy called for greater progress on the proposal for a CCCTB in the context of what is being referred to as a renewed contract between euro area member states. The Minister went on to say that as this is central to the current discussions by Heads of State in Brussels that he is precluded from making any further comment. I strongly urge him to pass on a clear message to Government and the Taoiseach that to give up or compromise on CCCTB is the equivalent of compromising on our corporate tax rate, and that it is equally as important. Notwithstanding that, it is important that we ensure fiscal discipline on monetary and economic policy in the Union. A deterrent must be introduced. The rules of the Stability and Growth Pact were broken by some of the larger countries, some of whom are to the forefront in seeking discipline now. It is important that we find a solution, but it is equally important that we protect our interests. The corporate tax rate and CCCTB are vitally important. We cannot let either of them go, because if we do, this country will become an outback in Europe.

I again thank Deputy Timmins for his comments. We have declared a willingness to participate constructively in the discussions on the common consolidated corporate tax base, CCCTB, draft directive and in the structured discussions on tax policy co-ordination in the framework of the Euro Plus Pact. We are committed to active engagement on the tax dossiers because only by actively engaging can we absolutely ensure a full and comprehensive discussion.

That engagement has no impact whatsoever on our corporation tax rate. In fact, the draft proposal on the CCCTB specifically states that there is no intention of extending harmonisation to the rates. We remain steadfastly committed to the 12.5% corporation tax rate on companies' trading profits, which is a central element of our strategy for an export-led sustainable economic recovery. I assure Deputy Timmins that I will bring his comments to the attention of the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan.

Financial Services Regulation

Ar an gcéad dul síos, ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis an Cheann Comhairle. This is my first time to speak during the Topical Issue debate. I do not like to raise the issue but I must do so. I said this morning to the Ceann Comhairle that the Christmas spirit prevailed when I was successful in having a matter selected for discussion during the Topical Issue debate, having submitted approximately 30 issues previously. However, there is no Christmas spirit outside the House, as will be evident from the issue I wish to raise.

It relates to a sad situation in Drangan, Thurles, County Tipperary. SOS Contractors, which is run by the White family, has been in business for four decades. They are not Johnny-come-latelies or newcomers to the business. They are honest, hardworking people — father, mother and four sons. They have given valuable employment and provided valuable services to farmers and others in County Tipperary, north and south, and beyond. On the night of 3 November, without notice of any kind, so-called agents of Bank of Ireland Finance called to the premises wearing hoodies in the dead of night. I call them nothing short of thugs. They were accompanied by gardaí, which is most shocking. They proceeded to break and enter into an adjoining property, travelled across two fields and upset stock, broke fences and removed a number of machines from the family's premises while covering CCTV cameras with strong lights. That is outrageous.

I have in my possession a tax clearance certificate issued by the tax office in Thurles to the family which is valid until 15 November 2012. The company's tax is up to date. The family does not have a problem with Bank of Ireland, which they deal with in Fethard, or in Clonmel. They never had a problem with the banking services offered there. However, what is going on in this country today is State terrorism, especially when the public, through the State, has such an interest in the pillar banks. I refer to the so-called pillar banks that we hold up as models which we wish to maintain in the future. We think we have got rid of all the bad ones. I compliment the ordinary, decent staff who work in those banks across the country, but those involved in this case are nothing short of cowboys. They have worked for promotion and received generous commissions. They try to trade on misery.

The family should have received notice or letters of intent. Two years previously they had tried to restructure their loans. In this case the machines that were taken were all from 2005, 2006 and 2007 and the payments on them were almost finished. I have a list of the payments made on them right up to September 2011. One payment for €5,000, which was made on 20 September, was in the possession of the bank but it still had not been cashed by 3 November. That is scandalous. There has been little communication and no explanation.

The machines were taken to Ganly Craigie for auction. The company holds big auctions which are widely advertised. I tell people to stay away from those auctions as they are buying people's misery. Those people no longer have the tools of the trade to carry out their work. What are they to do with their employees coming up to Christmas? This is a most awful situation visited on the family. The Black and Tans did not do such things. The landlords with their sheriffs coming in to evict people did not do it. These people came in the dead of night under the cover of gardaí who backed a paddy-wagon into the front of the family house and sat there for 40 minutes. The thugs did not identify themselves. To make matters worse, they were driving a repossessed jeep which did not have an NCT certificate or an insurance disc. The registration number was 08 CE 2982. It was stolen from elsewhere and is someone's else's misery. That was brought to the attention of the Garda who escorted the vehicle with five thugs inside it around the roads of County Tipperary for hours, from Drangan to Thurles to Littleton. This is appalling.

I am disappointed the Minister for Justice and Equality is not present. I have spoken to the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, on what the banks are doing to people. The previous speaker, Deputy Timmins, referred to what we have to protect in Europe but if we cannot protect hard-working decent taxpayers and small private businesses we will have no country, no employment and no one to get us out of the mess.

What happened was disgraceful.

On a point of information. I understand the issue was directed to the Minister for Finance, not the Minister for Justice and Equality.

I will be replying on behalf of the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan. Deputy Mattie McGrath has placed serious issues on the record. I urge him to write to the Garda superintendent in his district——

I have spoken to him.

——and to the Garda Commissioner about the issue in order to have it investigated. I understand there is also a complaints commission to identify the issue and respond to it because the Deputy has made serious charges in the House.

I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue. I have been informed by departmental officials that the issue of such repossessions has not been brought to the attention of the Department of Finance. I assume the Deputy is referring to hire purchase agreements.

The Central Bank has advised that there are no legislative requirements that oblige hire purchase providers to seek an authorisation from the bank for the provision of hire purchase agreements for consumers and-or small businesses. Notwithstanding this, hire purchase providers are required to comply with the relevant provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1995 when providing hire purchase agreements for consumers acting outside their business. In the Consumer Credit Act 1995 the hire purchase company is referred to as the owner. The Act contains a number of protections for what are referred to in the Act as the hirer of the goods. The Act defines the "hirer" as a consumer who takes, intends to take or has taken goods from an owner under a hire purchase agreement in return for periodic payments. However, the protections under the Act do not apply to small businesses.

In the case of small and medium enterprises, where hire purchase is provided by a bank under its banking licence, the bank is required to comply with the Central Bank's code of conduct for business lending to small and medium enterprises. The section on financial difficulties in the code requires firms to have in place procedures for the handling of arrears cases, to give the borrower reasonable time to solve an arrears problem and to endeavour to agree an approach to assist the borrower to solve an arrears problem. This section has recently been revised and now contains more detailed requirements. The revised requirements will be effective from 1 January 2012 and a copy is available on the Central Bank's website at www.centralbank.ie.

Credit intermediaries engaged in the provision of hire purchase agreements are required to seek authorisation under the Consumer Credit Act 1995 for the provision of such agreements for consumers. The National Consumer Agency is responsible for the authorisation of credit intermediaries.

In some instances, a person who is dissatisfied with his or her treatment by a hire purchase company can make a complaint to the Financial Services Ombudsman. To be eligible to make a complaint, the person has to be considered a consumer for the purposes of making a complaint to the ombudsman. The people who come within this definition include all personal customers acting outside their trade, business or profession; limited companies with a turnover of €3 million or less, and unincorporated bodies, partnerships and trusts. The remit of the Financial Services Ombudsman was extended to include complaints in relation to the providers of hire purchase agreements under Regulation 2 of the Central Bank Act 1942 (Financial Services Ombudsman) Regulations 2005.

The Financial Services Ombudsman is a statutory officer who deals independently with complaints from consumers about their individual dealings with financial service providers that have not been resolved by the providers after they have been through the internal complaints resolution system. It is a free service to the complainant. Compensation up to €250,000 can be awarded and decisions are binding, subject to appeal to the High Court.

Turning from the legislative provisions in relation to hire purchase agreements, I encourage businesses to shop around for the most suitable way of finding finance for new plant and machinery. I will send the rest of the reply to the Deputy

I acknowledge the fact that the question was tabled to the Minister for Finance. I mentioned the Minister for Justice and Equality because gardaí were involved. An investigation should be carried out in both Departments.

The Minister of State referred to the Consumer Credit Act 1995, but legislation does not matter to the people concerned. They came at the dead of night and broke into a neighbour's property. The owner of the premises was awakened by a good neighbour. The Community Alert scheme is very important in my county. I am a member of the national board of Muintir na Tíre which maintains it. The neighbour was going to work at 4.30 a.m. and heading for Dublin when he saw the activity at a cross-roads and machines being loaded up.

I accept what the Minister of State said about credit intermediaries and so on, but none of what he described happened in this case. Two years ago the owner of the business tried to reconstruct the payments with a lady called Sinéad Hayes from Bank of Ireland, but she was not seen again until she contacted it this week to try to mend fences.

The Deputy should not refer to a person who is not a Member by name. He may mention the names of banks.

I have actual evidence from the family. It is not hearsay. The same is happening in other parts of the country, including in the Minister of State's area, of which I have only anecdotal evidence.

A code of conduct does not matter to the people concerned. One of the machines they took was stolen because Bank of Ireland Finance had no payments for it and no knowledge of it. It was a Massey Ferguson 6490, registration number 06 TS 2758. It was taken away but driven back an hour later when it was discovered, four miles away, that it was not the right tractor. They also stole a hedge-cutter. Breaking and entering always amounted to stealing. They could have told the family in advance and come in the middle of the day. They took away a hedge-cutter valued at €20,000, on which the payments were with Woodchester Finance. The Minister of State advised people to shop around for finance. Woodchester Finance has informed the family that Bank of Ireland has passed the machinery over to it and that it is keeping it. The family has employees and farmers are waiting to have work done, but they cannot carry it out. Finance companies are all in a cartel. The public is paying for banks and bailing them out. The country has been brought to its knees, but the State protects and allows them to engage in this activity.

We need legislation immediately, as the public will not stand for this. It has been happening in many areas to builders and developers, and it may be that they had to go. However, the people about whom I am talking are contractors of good standing. They have been in business for 40 years and are decent people.

The Deputy has raised very serious issues which I am glad to know he has already brought to the attention of a Garda superintendent in the Thurles area. They should also be known to the Garda Commissioner.

The Deputy referred to a paddywagon. The implications for the gardaí who might have been present are serious and the matter needs to be investigated if a Garda vehicle was involved. In my experience, gardaí have never acted except in conformity with the law and in keeping with the proper discharge of their duty of care.

I do not know enough about the issue, but I ask the Deputy to be very careful about any imputation of the integrity of gardaí in an action in which they might be involved if they act within the law.

I accept that totally. I have full respect for gardaí and have supported them all my life. I am not blaming individual officers. They were brought out by a financial institution and there was no court order.

Residential Property Charge

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter.

I have received a number of complaints from constituents who own a number of properties which are mortgaged and rented to tenants. Because of their difficult and stressed financial position they find they are not able to make the non-principal private residence charge payments to their local authority.

There is a legal obligation to pay the charge which is covered by regulation. I ask the Minister of State to refer this aspect of the matter to the Department. Where there are exceptional circumstances and an individual or a combination of individuals find themselves in financial trouble, there should be provision to allow the charge to be paid on a phased basis. As the law stands, there is no provision for this; local authorities have no flexibility or leeway. A simple change to the regulations would be of considerable help.

The individual who raised the matter is not trying to find a way of not paying, but he said he could not pay on the due date. If one does not pay on the due date, interest accumulation kicks in. I am sure the legislation did not envisage penalising individuals who found themselves in stressed financial positions and facing them with that additional burden. Will the Department take another look at the charge and modify it to take account of special circumstances, such as I have outlined.

I thank my constituency colleague, Deputy Kirk, for raising this important matter. The Local Government (Charges) Act 2009 broadened the revenue base for local authorities by introducing this charge. The non-principal private residence charge is set at €200 and liability for it falls, in the main, on rental holiday and vacant properties. Proceeds from the charge are paid to the local authorities and used to fund the provision of vital local services.

The 2009 Act is structured from a starting position of there being a universal liability for the charge in respect of all residential property. Liability arises each year on a point-in-time basis, 31 March. A number of exemptions from the charge are included, the most significant being where a property is the owner's sole or main residence. The charge is paid on a self-assessment basis. It is a matter for the owner of a residential property to assess whether there is a liability to pay the charge in the first instance. The Act provides for the application of late payment fees of €20 in respect of each month or part of a month for which the charge remains unpaid after the due date. In addition, both the €200 charge and any accumulated late payment fees remain as a charge against the property concerned.

The Act does not provide for a general waiver scheme. I remind the Deputy that his party was in government when the legislation for this charge was put in place. I understand that the view was taken when the legislation was being drafted that a waiver scheme would not be necessary or appropriate. First, owners of properties other than their sole or main residence would not normally be in a category of persons for which a waiver scheme would be necessary or appropriate. Second, waiver schemes have proved disproportionately difficult and time-consuming to administer.

In exceptional circumstances, where there is genuine hardship demonstrated by an individual, a local authority can consider utilising its powers under section 6 of the Act. This provision places the collection of the charge under the care and management of the relevant local authority concerned. This is a standard provision which is also in the Finance Acts. The care and management provision allows the Revenue Commissioners some flexibility in addressing difficult cases. It is a matter, therefore, for the local authority concerned to examine the particular circumstances of the cases mentioned by Deputy Kirk. They have powers in exceptional circumstances to deal with the issue.

I am happy to take the assurance of the Minister of State on this matter. We will have to return to the local authority and point out the provision and see if some arrangement can be reached.

Suicide Prevention

I welcome the opportunity to raise the issue of the use of minor tranquilisers in intentional overdoses and attempted suicide.

In 2010, the national deliberate self-harm registry recorded 3,568 intentional overdoses involving minor tranquilisers, benzodiazepines. These account for 30% of all self-harm presentations at accident and emergency departments in 2010. Access to these medications is through prescription, illegal purchases through the Internet and purchases on the streets. Given the rate of use in overdoses, it is clear there is an oversupply of such medications at present. In September 2010, a European initiative between regulatory authorities and Interpol seized large quantities of Internet purchased medications, including minor tranquilisers.

Anecdotal evidence would suggest that these medications are regularly prescribed to people suffering from common medical health complaints, such as anxiety or mild depression. Such prescriptions are often repeated without the patient being advised to seek alternative therapies for their symptoms. While there is no doubt that such medications have a place in treating certain mental health as well as other medical conditions, it is important that greater controls be put in place to prevent people accessing sufficient amounts to use in an intentional overdose. Raising awareness with the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland, the Irish College of General Practitioners and the College of Psychiatry would seem the most logical way to reduce prescriptions of these medications. I suggest the Department of Health and the HSE should seriously consider making an approach in this regard to these organisations.

The objective of Reach Out, the national strategy for action on suicide prevention published in 2005, states it is necessary to "limit access to the means and methods of self harm and suicide". It is internationally recognised and repeatedly proven that restricting the means of suicide is a key approach in suicide prevention. There are many examples to support this throughout the world, including the restriction of firearms. Even in the United Kingdom, following the introduction of catalytic converters, there was a considerable drop in the levels of suicide.

The HSE is currently running a campaign to reduce the overuse and over prescription of antibiotics. It should now look at a similar campaign to reduce the overuse of minor tranquilisers. Overdosing is a common method of self-harm, involving 71% of all self-harm acts registered last year, and more so among women, 77%, than men, 65%. Of all intentional drug overdoses, 42% involved a minor tranquiliser, representing 3,568 overdoses, as I already mentioned. A high proportion of overdoses involving minor tranquilisers has been observed since 2004, without any significant change and with an over-representation of men. Almost half of all female overdoses, 48%, and 36% of all male overdoses involved an analgesic drug.

Top
Share