JOINT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE debate -
Wednesday, 4 Apr 2007

Draft Interim Report on Under-Claiming of Tax Credits, Allowances and Relief: Discussion.

Chairman

The next matter on the agenda is the draft interim report on under-claiming of tax credits, allowances and relief by taxpayers. I hope to reach agreement on the text of the report because I intend that the committee will launch it on the afternoon of Wednesday, 11 April in the audio-visual room of Leinster House. The draft report is private and I ask members not to circulate details of it until it is published next Wednesday.

The draft report was circulated last week and members were asked to make any observations they might have. No observations have been received from members of the committee but when drafting reports I try to genuinely reflect comments of members in the observations and conclusion. Since our last meeting, we have received a letter from the Institute of Taxation, which is happy with the report. We sent the report to people who had attended our hearings. The Revenue Commissioners have submitted a schedule of suggested amendments, which has been circulated, and I hope to make recommendations on them as we proceed. The chairman of the Revenue Commissioners has written a letter stating that he considered parts of the report to be negative. We will hold our own opinion on that but he may have made some valid points which we can incorporate.

The table of contents of the report can be cleared. I propose to discuss pages 11 to 20, inclusive, which comprise the main content of the report. The remaining content includes the formal Chairman's report, membership of the joint committee, witnesses, appendices and the terms of reference. I propose that we include a schedule 3, glossary of terms, which I asked the Revenue Commissioners to compile in regard to tax affairs. The glossary has been circulated and mainly consists of factual information on the meaning of terms such as "tax credit", "tax allowance", "flat rate expenses", "standard rate of tax" and "marginal rates". It will be beneficial to members of the public to define these terms.

I am incorporating some of the amendments suggested by the Revenue Commissioners and, having considered the correspondence received, circulated a page of amendments which I propose to add to the report.

On page 5, the Chairman's introduction, the Revenue suggests the reference to "medical insurance" should be changed to "medical expenses", and I propose to make that change. I hope pages 5 and 6 are agreed.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Will the Chairman clarify the change?

Chairman

On page 5, line 6, we are substituting the word "expenses" for "insurance". We referred to "medical insurance" but should have used the term "medical expenses".

Deputy Ó Caoláin

All right.

Chairman

It is only a word change. I thank the Revenue Commissioners for checking the report for accuracy. Page 8 is included for spacing purposes and page 9 contains the list of witnesses. The meat of our report begins thereafter. The introduction begins on page 10 and page 11 outlines what we are doing. I do not propose to read the report paragraph by paragraph. Members can glance through it and will hopefully agree to the proposed amendments as we proceed.

In paragraph 2.1, where it is stated: "The Revenue Commissioners deserve to be congratulated for the enhanced services they have provided which include initiatives such as the Revenue web site, the Revenue-On-Line Service, the PAYE 1890 telephone service," I propose to add: "the mobile phone texting facility," for contacting the tax office. After "AERTEL facility", I propose to add: "The Committee recognises the genuine and very significant efforts on the part of the Revenue Commissioners in recent years to make what is a complex tax system more understandable and more accessible, particularly to the PAYE sector".

I have considered the letter sent from the chairman of the Revenue Commissioners to the committee but I do not accept everything he wrote. He thinks the report is unduly negative but he has a point in that some improvements have been made. The proposed amendments acknowledge the improvements but we are holding to the opinion that a lot of people do not have adequate information on tax matters.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

May I speak on this?

Chairman

Yes. I have no difficulty if members do not want to agree to this amendment.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I am somewhat concerned this amendment might represent a watering down of the thrust of the draft report. I listened carefully to the representatives of the Revenue Commissioners who attended on 24 January, Mr.Gillanders and Mr. Rigney, and went through the transcript of that day's exchange. In the course of the presentation, an indication was given of the speed with which the Revenue responded to correspondence and applications for rebates of overpaid PAYE income tax.

On 29 December 2006, the last operating day for presentation of cases pertaining to 2002 under the new four-year rule, I visited the Revenue Commissioners' office in Dundalk, which covers the area in which I live. I had claims to make concerning mortgage interest, which I have not yet put into the direct arrangements that have been in place for some time, and orthodontic treatment for two of my children. I knew I had to submit my claim on that day in order to include them for 2002. The forms were stamped and accepted, and the official dealing with me, who was very courteous and able, assured me that everything was in order. Some considerable passage of weeks later I received correspondence stating I must complete X different forms included with the postal matter. On the first occasion I was told I had no such forms to complete, that they had been stamped and would be processed in the normal course. I completed those forms and promptly sent them off. In recent weeks I received a huge brown envelope full of forms galore. It is incredible. Some of the information is erroneous. I had to complete them to cover each of the years——

Chairman

Return of income for each of the years.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

——right up to 2006. I did not go in to sort out 2004, 2005 or 2006. I only wanted to deal with 2002 and 2003 and it was all I had gathered in terms of mortgage interest certificates and all the other bits and bobs from the orthodontic practice.

In the contribution made by the Revenue Commissioners to this committee a ten-day efficient turnaround response was mentioned as was an effective and efficient refunding process. From 29 December to today, 4 April, I am no further on and appear to be much further back. One should see the colossal tome of forms that must now be completed. Because of work commitments I have not been able to sit down and prepare all of it. I am a PAYE taxpayer with no other source of income apart from my Dáil salary.

Personal experience reflects the reality of the experience for a great number of people. For many people in the PAYE sector there seem to be more obstacles than means of assistance to secure the return of their overpaid PAYE or secure the benefits to which they should quite rightly be entitled.

All the grand words uttered here and the self-congratulatory approach of the Revenue Commissioners do not answer the total inadequacy of their disposition towards the rights of PAYE workers to refunds and the credits to which they are entitled. I do not wish to be a party to a report that overstates the regard of this committee for the effort employed. It does not match up to the words proposed by the Chairman in the second amendment and I ask the committee to reconsider. Everything I stated is factual. This should be much more straightforward. I had a direct meeting with the Revenue Commissioners in their regional office in Dundalk which should have concluded the business. However, here I am these months later. I will be tenacious and go back after it. Many people would be utterly dissuaded and frightened off from pursuing their rightful entitlements.

Chairman

I appreciate the point and will return to it.

Deputy Bruton

With regard to the wording——

Chairman

I will withdraw it.

Deputy Bruton

The existing text states the Revenue Commissioners deserve to be congratulated. At best they do their jobs and congratulations are a little fulsome. It could state, "The committee recognises the effort" but the phrase "deserve to be congratulated" is a little over the top.

I wish to comment on various sections. With regard to paragraph 2.2 we should obtain the quantification and list some of them. The evidence contained interesting facts on DIRT tax, rent and bins. With regard to bin collection, a provision of payment in full and on time is included whereby if one pays one's bin charges late one will not receive the tax relief. Changing jobs is another area of confusion which led people to contact me. It would be useful if the committee used existing evidence to list instances where we believe overpayment has occurred. It would strengthen the case.

The Chairman's comments at a previous committee meeting on the difficulties with regard to his form are not accurately reflected in the text. He commented on the difficulties experienced in making claims by people who receive the tax notice. The tone is congratulatory whereas what the Chairman stated was that one would need to be astute to deal with the form.

Chairman

We will include it.

Deputy Bruton

We must set a date by which we expect the deduction at source to be in place. The Chairman correctly points out that the Minister removed the threshold for medical relief so this can be moved on immediately. I do not know a realistic date to see deductions at source for items that do not have inhibitions such as trade union subscriptions, perhaps 2009.

Deputy Paul McGrath's point deserves to be included even though the Minister did not agree with it. If one is caught by the Revenue Commissioners they can go back six years and state one was negligent but one may also have been negligent in not claiming medical or other relief and allowances. The point made by Deputy Paul McGrath was that one is caught for what one owes but one is not allowed unclaimed credits. It seems a bit unfair.

If someone is found to have had an overpayment of social welfare——

Chairman

We have a recommendation——

Deputy Bruton

——but they were entitled to FIS, it is taken into account that he or she was entitled to FIS during that period and one is balanced against the other.

Chairman

One of our recommendations is to review the four-year rule.

Deputy Bruton

Yes, but Deputy Paul McGrath's point deserves mention. Other than that I have some comments to make when we discuss the recommendations.

Chairman

I understand what the Deputy states and I will withdraw the amendment. On the other side of the argument, I am aware of many people in my constituency who received refund cheques within 48 hours or reaction to a return of forms within one week. I saw cases such as those referred to dealt with in a period of ten days and cheques issues. A variety of experience exists and it is not uniform. I have no problem in withdrawing the amendment.

We will now discuss paragraph 2.2, regarding allowances and credits. It states we have not had sufficient quantification on this and we include a recommendation that there should be a report on it. I suggest the phrase "greater determination" should be used in the final sentence rather than "such determination". Is that agreed? Agreed.

With regard to paragraph 2.3, in the interest of accuracy the number of people who claimed trade union subscriptions for the year 2006 was 320,000, which is more up-to-date information. With regard to paragraph 2.4 I propose a new paragraph which is on the sheet circulated to members.

Deputy Bruton

May I suggest the Chairman adds the comments he made on the forms.

Chairman

We will include them. After paragraph 2.4 it is proposed to insert:

The Committee welcomed the information presented by the Revenue Commissioners at the meeting on 24 January 2007, highlighting the variety of ways which make it easier for the general public to contact their tax office. While the information was welcomed, some of it was news to members of the Committee, and based on the experience of members as public representatives on the ground, the Committee believes that greater effort must be made by the Revenue Commissioners to ensure that all members of the general public are aware of their full entitlements.

I am proposing this because the Revenue Commissioners indicated that great systems are in place. Although great systems are in place, they were news to some members of the committee. I never knew information was available on Aertel or by text message. I was pleased to hear it but if I had not heard it, I am quite sure very few of my constituents would have heard of it. The Revenue Commissioners have the systems but as we did not know about it, the public probably did not know about it.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I have a small point which is clearly typographical. The section of the sentence following the date, 24 January 2007, reads "highlighting the variety of ways which it make it easier for".

Chairman

It should be "which makes it easier". That is a typo.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

"Which makes it easier".

Chairman

That is a typo; we will correct it.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Take one "it" out and put the "s" in.

Chairman

Agreed.

I am proposing another paragraph after this. The Deputy may have a problem with it but it would read:

The committee notes that when contacted by a taxpayer, the Revenue Commissioners have, in general, greatly increased efficiency in recent years in dealing with such queries and issuing amended tax certificates and tax refunds where appropriate.

That is not generally proven so we will withdraw it. It is the same point.

We are on to 2.5, which requires a factual correction. Line 3 indicates that 1.5 million people receive standard notices from the tax office. The figure should now be 2.2 million, and we will accept the Revenue's factual correction as it would have the exact figure.

Deputy Bruton is indicating that we should expand that paragraph to refer to the format of the letter that would issue with the PAYE notice of determination of tax credit and standard rate cut-off point. It should be highlighted that the precise meaning of this is not clear to ordinary members of the public and the terminology and jargon is not explained. It should be emphasised as an example of unclear correspondence to the public.

The next item is paragraph 2.6, dealing with tax relief at source. We will come to that, specifically a recommendation from Deputy Bruton to try to put dates on it. With regard to paragraph 2.7, there is a recommendation from the Revenue Commissioners to change the wording of the last sentence to improve its factual accuracy. The sentence would read, "The committee is pleased to note that this issue was addressed by the Minister in the Finance Bill 2007, and no threshold will now apply to tax relief on medical expenses incurred from 2007 onwards". That is slightly more accurate wording than appeared in the first draft.

With regard to paragraph 2.8——

Deputy Ó Caoláin

We do not have the list being referred to by the Chairman.

Chairman

Members should have it.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

The Chairman has moved from his own list.

Chairman

I am operating from two lists. The Revenue Commissioners supplied a list of recommendations and the Chairman wrote a separate letter, so we have two lists. The Deputy can supply amendments.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I have it here.

Chairman

I have not had an opportunity to combine the two documents into one. We are operating with two parallel documents.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

It is this other document, from Mr. Declan Rigney, the principal officer.

Chairman

I may have a copy of it in my correspondence.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

We would normally get a correspondence schedule.

Chairman

The Deputy will get a copy. I am operating from two documents.

We were moving on to paragraph 2.9. There is a proposal for an amendment to the sentence in this paragraph reading, "The Revenue Commissioners should be in a position to analyse the information available to them or the absence of information to facilitate and prompt taxpayers to claim their correct entitlements". The sentence is on page 14. I wish to include the word "more" before "taxpayers". Some are claiming their correct entitlements but we want the remainder to do so. The Revenue suggested the alteration because some people are clearly claiming the correct entitlements.

There are no proposed amendments for paragraph 2.10 but we deal with it in our recommendations. I am proposing an amendment to paragraph 2.11, which deals with an issue we have all spoken about before. With regard to the four-year rule, the Revenue suggests the wording should state, "While the taxpayer has only four years to pursue overpayments, Revenue can go back indefinitely where there is fraud or neglect". That is the accurate reflection, whereas we spoke of "non-compliance or wilful neglect". The Revenue Commissioners has indicated this is not actually stated.

Deputy Bruton

Deputy Paul McGrath made the point that neglect could be a neglect to make a claim as well as neglecting to make a return. The Deputy made the case that when the Revenue Commissioners open a case to go back beyond four years, it would seem inequitable for a taxpayer not to get the credit for under-claiming.

Chairman

We will insert the Revenue wording because it is more accurate and we will make an addition——

Deputy Finneran

What is that?

Chairman

The wording is at the end of page 14, and it states Revenue can go back indefinitely.

Deputy Finneran

I appreciate that, but what is the wording from the Revenue?

Chairman

The wording is "where there is fraud or neglect". I used the wording "where non-compliance or wilful neglect is suspected".

Deputy Finneran

Why is the wording "wilful neglect" included?

Chairman

I am seeking to take out "wilful neglect".

Deputy Finneran

"Neglect" should be sufficient.

Chairman

I am proposing to take out the words——

Deputy Finneran

There could be an oversight.

Chairman

I am taking out the wording "where non-compliance or wilful neglect is suspected" and proposing to replace it with "where there is fraud or neglect".

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I would point out——.

Chairman

I am amending the wording.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I fully——

Deputy Finneran

Is the recommendation being included?

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Finneran

The recommendation is inadequate in my view.

Chairman

We will strengthen the recommendation because that is the real issue. We do not have much left.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I welcome Deputy Finneran's contribution but I fear the Revenue Commissioners are only reaffirming the case that a taxpayer has only four years to pursue overpayments. We should not think the next section of that sentence, "Revenue can go back indefinitely where there is fraud or neglect" will actually aid or abet the taxpayer, or that the Revenue would support a taxpayer seeking refund of overpayments beyond four years.

Chairman

We will include that in our recommendation.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

It is important we do that.

Chairman

We will. We are going through our observations but we have a recommendation on that issue, which we will strengthen.

Deputy Finneran

What of the wording at the bottom of page 14?

Chairman

The wording from the Revenue Commissioners is "Revenue can go back indefinitely where there is fraud or neglect".That is the current position and we are saying it is not fair, in the eyes of the committee. The factual position is that although the taxpayer has only four years to pursue overpayments, Revenue can go back indefinitely where there is fraud or neglect. We have a recommendation on the point.

Deputy Finneran

Are the words "where non-compliance or wilful neglect is suspected" being removed?

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Bruton

That is because it is the law, not because we agree with it.

Chairman

Exactly.

Deputy Bruton

It is being changed because it is what the law states, not because we agree with it.

Chairman

I produced a draft that included the phrase "where non-compliance or wilful neglect is suspected". The Revenue Commissioners told me the wording was not accurate in the eyes of the law. It has indicated the words should read "where there is fraud or neglect". My phraseology was inaccurate.

Deputy Finneran

Not "wilful neglect".

Chairman

My draft was imprecise. I will accept the correction on factual grounds. We are arguing this is not fair play in the eyes of the committee and we will give a very strong recommendation when the time comes.

There is a small correction to be made in paragraph 2.12. As I overstated the effect, I want to change "Committee found that one area of tax relief, which potentially could apply to hundreds of thousands of workers" to "many thousands of workers".

Deputy Bruton

What is the principle behind granting or not granting the reliefs?

Chairman

We refer to this issue in our recommendations. After our meeting with the gentleman from Revenue, I spoke to him and he gave me a printout of approximately 200 occupations entitled to the flat rate expenses. Some 1.2 million people are in receipt of the relief. It varies by the equivalent of €60 per person.

Everyone working in a shop is entitled to a flat rate expense of €60 for the clothes they wear. Carpenters and plumbers get expenses for their tools. Nurses get them for cleaning their uniforms, although different rates apply if the uniforms are supplied, cleaned at work or cleaned at home. I will circulate the printout by way of information because the details are not on Revenue's website. When I asked where the list came from, the man told me it had been agreed through social partnership. The list is large and cumbersome, but it would be useful for people to know the details. It is a hidden issue we uncovered.

Deputy Bruton

Do coherent principles underpin the matter? Was the Chairman satisfied about why one person is left out and another is included?

Chairman

The reason is simple. Where a person incurs a cost in respect of his or her tools or clothing required for work, there is an allowance. I will circulate the list and the rates claimable by each category of employee. It was surprising that while most people had not heard of the relief, they had been given it automatically. It is a little mystery.

Deputy Finneran

It is not advertised.

Chairman

It is included in the recommendation. No further changes or observations have been made. We have highlighted the taxsaver travel pass scheme, which is not on Revenue's website. I had great fun asking the gentleman about how to find the information. He told me to go through the public transport sector, as CIE advertises for its own purposes. The pass can be found as a benefit-in-kind in the bowels of Revenue's computers if one knows to search there.

We will move to the recommendations. Members can strengthen them if they want, as I prepared the draft to be helpful. Deputy Bruton called for an independent assessment of the amount of underclaimed tax reliefs and allowances. When the assessment is completed and we have the information, we should consider the issue of a tax ombudsman or tax advocate. The committee has mixed opinions on whether there should be an ombudsman, but the matter is worth examining.

Members want to strengthen the recommendation on the four-year rule "which prevents taxpayers claiming tax rebates outside of this period". Abolishing the rule seems to be the consensus.

Deputy Bruton

The normal statute of limitations period is six years, but it was reduced to four years a number of years ago. I cannot remember the rationale offered.

Deputy Finneran

Should we recommend a return to the six-year rule?

Chairman

I would not be happy with it.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I would like to clarify the matter. Are we sure that a six-year rule applied previously? Was it not ten years?

Chairman

There was no rule. I do not know why we should narrow it to any year. Since the matter arose, many people have approached me regarding a considerable change in the incapacitated child care credit announced in the budget. People at a school near me had not heard of the credit before Christmas week. Some of the people in question have incapacitated children who are now teenagers. While it is their fault they did not claim the credit, they are entitled to a full rebate.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Why time-lock it?

Chairman

Administrative convenience is the only reason because there is nothing in the rule for the taxpayer. Perhaps we should ask for the four-year rule to be abolished, which would answer everyone's argument.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Yes.

Deputy Finneran

It would be a level playing field.

Chairman

We will ask to have the rule abolished, which means we will not need to deal with the precise recommendation on the incapacitated child credit.

Regarding paragraph 3.4 on tax relief at source, Deputy Bruton wants the committee to recommend timelines.

Deputy Bruton

Now that medical and trade union subscription reliefs are straightforward, we should name a date of 2009, for example. We might be told that it is not feasible.

Chairman

We are discussing reliefs on trade union subscriptions, medical expenses, rent costs and public transport for commuters. Tax relief at source is mentioned because it is only an advantage if one is paying tax, but one gets no tax advantage on public transport if one is on the 0% rate. If the costs are relieved at source, everyone gets the value of 20% or whatever the rate will be. The higher one's tax rate, the larger the rebate on commuting to work via public transport. That rebate is worth more than €1,000 per annum for people on the 41% tax rate commuting from Portlaoise, unlike those working part-time. Will we recommend that the programme be fully implemented by 2009?

Deputy Bruton

A refund is slightly different because it is given at one's top rate of tax and one must make a return. A simple form filled out in a surgery, for example, should be dispatched automatically after one pays the bill. It must return to one's tax office to determine which tax rate one is on.

Chairman

What amendment should we make?

Deputy Bruton

It is not tax relief at source in the same way as VHI is relieved at source. Rather, it is a flat rate of 20% and all claims are identical. We need another sentence referring to medical expenses and nursing homes.

Chairman

Will the Deputy give us the gist of the sentence?

Deputy Bruton

In the case of medical expenses where relief is available at the marginal rate, separate arrangements need to be made by Revenue to——

Chairman

Maintain this.

Deputy Bruton

——make it easy for people to make the claim at the point of sale or whatever.

Chairman

The point of contact with the medical professional.

Deputy Bruton

Yes. That would not overcome the problem encountered by people on the 0% rate.

Chairman

They should get relief at 20% when the form is submitted.

Deputy Bruton

The Chairman should include that provision. From an administrative point of view, the matter is complicated by the relief being available at one's marginal rate.

Chairman

We will include an extra sentence to the effect that the medical expenses situation needs to be dealt with separately. Will the Deputy run his sentence by me again?

Deputy Bruton

Arrangements made at the point of sale——

Chairman

The point of contact.

Deputy Bruton

Yes, where a simplified claim could be made at the time.

Chairman

Claim forms should be available at all medical——

Deputy Bruton

Effectively, one would put one's PPS number on the bill, which would then be used for tax purposes.

Chairman

A standardised form.

Senator White

That is what is being done in respect of VHI.

Deputy Bruton

Relief on VHI is 20% across the board. Others could be done in a block.

Chairman

That is a good suggestion. Those of us who must get their eyes tested have their claims processed by the optician, although it is a Department of Social and Family Affairs matter.

Deputy Bruton

That should be the case in surgeries.

Chairman

We will ask that forms be made available in surgeries so that people can get the benefit of the tax reliefs.

Senator White

Could the claims be processed automatically in the system via IT?

Chairman

That is what we are asking the Revenue Commissioners. We ask that a system for all these tax reliefs be in place by 2009.

Senator White

This will be done by computer. People are not relaxed at the point of service and it is tricky for them to do it there.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Regarding paragraph 3.5, I suggest we stick to the formula of words used in the draft report and do not accept the Revenue Commissioners' proposed amendment. The draft version reflects the views of members.

Chairman

I agree. Paragraph 3.6 reads: "The Committee is not satisfied with the effectiveness and value for money of Revenue's expenditure on information and publicity campaigns relating to tax relief and credits." I propose to add the words: "based on the large number of people who are overpaying tax". That clarifies why we are making the point. The paragraph continues: "It is recommended that this expenditure be more targeted to increase its effectiveness and that specific targets be set (in terms of increased take up of credits and allowances) against which the success of information campaigns can be measured."

Deputy Bruton

Has the Chairman commented on the one document a taxpayer receives which was described as excessively complex?

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Bruton

That is the one point of contact for people every year. A simple letter could list a number of scenarios.

Chairman

I had proposed the following amendment to paragraph 3.6: "While there has been an improvement in the number of people contacting the Tax Office, it is clear that the message from these campaigns has not registered with vast numbers of taxpayers." The Revenue Commissioners maintain there has been an increase as a result of advertising and publicity campaigns. That may be true but the message has not registered with vast numbers of taxpayers.

Deputy Bruton

A very simple and well designed information sheet could be sent with the tax free allowance certificate. That would be the ideal vehicle. It could pose questions on renting and inform of tax reliefs with a suggestion that the taxpayer telephone or text a certain number for more information.

Chairman

The phrase in paragraph 3.7 should read "and prompt more taxpayers", a correction of one word.

Paragraph 3.8 deals with the formula suggested by Deputy Bruton. It reads: "It is recommended that Revenue undertake a systematic review of all its information leaflets and claim forms, to address the design, complexity and language of these documents, to ensure that they are clearly understandable and easily usable by the general public." We should give the example of the standard notice of PAYE credits.

Deputy Bruton

It should alert people to areas where they are not claiming credits to the extent they are entitled to do so.

Chairman

We could include the ten most common ones, not a list of 108.

Deputy Bruton

Does the National Adult Literacy Agency, NALA, help people to write such documents in plain language?

Chairman

I have not heard of it. Paragraph 3.9 reads: "A primary task of the Revenue Commissioners must be to eliminate the fear of officialdom which discourages some sectors of the public from claiming their full tax entitlements. The Committee recommends that the Revenue Commissioners bring forward concrete proposals to address this problem." The committee does not have the answer but the Revenue Commissioner should address it. Paragraphs 3.10 and 3.11 read:

3.10 In the context of the significant increase in the availability of rental accommodation in recent years, the Committee recommends that the Revenue Commissioners should attempt to identify tenants in a systematic manner to encourage them to claim tax relief on rental costs. This would also have the additional benefit of encouraging greater tax compliance among landlords.

3.11 The Committee recommends that the Taxsaver travel pass scheme for commuters be promoted more actively by the Revenue Commissioners and be advertised prominently on the Revenue website and other media. The number of people availing of this scheme and the cost of the scheme to the Exchequer should also be quantified. In addition, it is recommended that the scheme should be reviewed and amended so that employees whose employers do not operate the scheme can benefit from tax relief.

The Revenue Commissioners do not know how many are availing of the scheme or how much it costs. The employer pays Iarnród Éireann for the monthly or annual commuter ticket and deducts the cost, minus tax, from the wages of the employee. It is strictly between the employer and the employee. I have no problem with the scheme but it should be quantified. Regarding the last sentence of paragraph 3.11, small companies with a handful of employees may not be bothered participating in the scheme. Employees of such small companies should not be disadvantaged.

Paragraph 3.12 reads: "The scheme of "Flat-rate expenses" relief for workers, which can potentially apply to workers in many sectors, should be advertised more widely by Revenue and should be given greater prominence on the Revenue website and other media." We agree on this matter and I will supply further information.

This is a draft report, not a public document. It will not be available to the public or the media until we finalise our amendments and publish it at 3 p.m. on Wednesday in the audio-visual room. We will hold a formal committee meeting at 2.30 p.m. to discuss other items of business before launching the report. The format is that the Chairman gives an overview before Opposition spokespersons make comments and observations. Journalists can direct questions to committee members.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Are we meeting at 2.30 p.m. in the committee room?

Chairman

Yes. There may be routine items of correspondence and we may wish to finalise arrangements for the press conference. It is a meeting of the joint committee because it is a report of that committee.