Skip to main content
Normal View

Select Sub-Committee on Finance debate -
Wednesday, 18 Feb 2015

Vote 10 - Office of the Appeal Commissioners (Revised)

Apologies have been received from Deputy Alan Farrell.

On 18 December 2014, the Dáil ordered that the following Revised Estimates for Public Services 2015 be referred to this committee for consideration: Vote 7 - Office of the Minister for Finance; Vote 8 - Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General; Vote 9 - Office of the Revenue Commissioners; and Vote 10 - Office of the Appeal Commissioners. I welcome the Minister for Finance and his officials to the meeting. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the Revised Estimates and supplementary performance information regarding the outputs and impacts of programme expenditure. I call on the Minister to give his opening statement.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before the select committee today in connection with the 2015 Estimates for my Department and for the offices under the ambit of my Department, including the Revenue Commissioners, the Appeal Commissioners and the Comptroller and Auditor General. I thank the Officers of my Department for their ongoing dedication and commitment as we continue to develop sustainable macro-economic, fiscal and financial services strategies for the future and work through external programme support monitoring.

Before we commence our discussion of the 2015 Estimates, I would like to touch briefly on the key outputs of the Department during 2014. During the course of 2014, our EU and international division continued to engage at various fora with a view to representing, protecting and advancing Ireland's interests on the wider stage. Following the successful exit from the EU-IMF programme in 2013, the work of the division was refocused on maximising Ireland's position in a post-programmes environment including, managing the EU semester and our interaction with the European institutions, the IMF and the OECD.

A key element of the work of the division in 2014 was the re-financing of the IMF loans, a transaction that will deliver at least €1.5 billion in savings to Ireland over the lifetime of the loans. To date, two repayments totalling some €12.5 billion, representing 54% of our €22.5 billion IMF loan facility, have been completed. The impact of this - the reduction of the interest bill on the national debt - reduces the amount of tax revenues and borrowing that go towards financing the debt. This frees up resources for investment in activities that will grow the economy and create jobs and opportunities. This has knock-on benefits across the economy and can lower the cost of debt for businesses and families.

In the banking and financial services area, the division delivered against an extensive list of objectives across the sector. The banks continue to make significant progress in regaining financial health and have benefited from the general improvement in the macro-economic environment. To date, this progress has allowed us to commence the process of monetising our banking investments with the sale of our Bank of Ireland, BOI, debt instruments. Much of the banking-related work in the Department of Finance in 2015 will now focus on AIB. Given the nature of our investment and the range of options available to recoup value from the bank, officials within my Department are working with AIB on reconfiguring its capital structure. Goldman Sachs International has been appointed to provide financial advice to the Department in this regard.

Both AIB and BOI returned to profit in the first half of 2014, on the back of improving interest margins and reduced levels of impairments. With this improvement in profitability, the rate of the regulatory capital build in 2014 at AIB and BOI has been impressive. The funding position for Irish banks is in good shape with both AIB and BOI comfortably within the required loan-to-deposit ratio and with ready access to the wholesale debt markets at a cost that continues to improve. Overall the results of the recent ECB comprehensive assessment confirm the strength of the Irish banking system. Arrears management is an area of continued focus and the banks are beginning to make real progress in this area with reductions in non-performing loans evidenced across all loan portfolios. The latest Central Bank statistics show that the number of mortgage accounts for principal dwelling houses in arrears fell for the fifth consecutive quarter.

In other areas of financial services, the Minister of State, Deputy Harris, is focused on the new IFS strategy where we will look to build on the success of this important sector of the export economy, which contributes to State revenue as well as employing some 35,000 people directly. The EU legislative reform programme continues, with progress across a number of areas, including the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive, the Single Supervisory Mechanism, and the Single Resolution Mechanism-Fund.

The key objective for the fiscal policy division in 2014 was to continue to deliver on our deficit targets and to reduce the debt. Restoring ordering to the public finances was a necessary precondition for the growth that we are now experiencing. Taxes continued to perform ahead of targets and we have been exceeding our deficit target in 2014 and are on track to reduce the deficit below 3% in 2015.

Considerable resources were also focused on an extensive study of Ireland's corporation tax policy during 2014. This resulted in a budget day publication of An Economic Impact Assessment of Ireland's Corporation Tax Policy, a comprehensive output the purpose of which was to quantify the effect of the three elements underpinning Ireland's corporation tax policy - rate, regime and reputation. Comprehensive reviews, involving public consultation exercises, were completed in respect of the special assignee relief programme, the foreign earnings deduction and the employment and investment incentive. A review of tax measures in the farming sector, which was announced in budget 2014 as a joint initiative between the Department of Finance and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, was also completed, resulting in the publication of the agri-tax review. This review detailed a number of recommendations for the agri-tax area, and a cost-benefit analysis of these measures.

Ireland is fully committed to the OECD BEPS process but we must also secure our revenue stream which provides the necessary funding for our public expenditure. In this context, the division therefore also focused the opportunities for Ireland in an international tax policy context. The recently published A Road Map for Ireland's Tax Competitiveness updates Ireland's international tax strategy and sets out a comprehensive package of competitive tax measures designed to reposition Ireland to reap the benefits of sustainable foreign direct investment and a changing international tax landscape.

The budget introduced in October was also the first mildly expansionary budget introduced by this Government and significant resources were focused on reforms to the income tax system to support those at work and create jobs. The changes to the income tax system introduced in budget 2015 which came into effect last month mean that all those who pay income tax and-or USC are seeing an increase in their take home pay when compared to someone on the same income level last year. As Deputies will be aware, this is the first phase of a reform plan to reduce the tax burden on low and middle-income earners.

The economic division continued to engage in research projects designed to inform our policy options and macroeconomic framework in order to better support the Department and the Government in decision-making. In pursuit of this strategy, my Department recently signed an agreement with the Economic and Social Research Institute with the aim of undertaking and disseminating research on various macroeconomic and taxation issues.

Both economic activity and employment are on the rise again in Ireland. The latest economic forecasts were published by the Department of Finance in October last for budget 2015. They include forecast increases in gross domestic product of 4.7% for 2014 and 3.9% for 2015. The rate of economic growth in Ireland was the fastest in the EU. The national accounts figures for the third quarter of 2014 broadly support the expected outturn for 2014 in relation to total economic activity as well as for employment, exports and domestic demand. More recent hard data has strengthened the assessment that 2014 was a very good year for the Irish economy and they provide positive indicators for 2015.

Growth is coming from two main sources, the domestic-facing economy and the foreign-owned sector. Consumer spending was strong in 2014, with retail sales up over 6% compared with 2013. Manufacturing production in 2014 as a whole was 20.9% higher than in 2013. The total number of new vehicles licensed in January this year was some 26% higher than in January 2014. Consumer confidence is at a seven-year high in January and tax revenues grew by 9% last year.

The recovery has been most evident in the labour market, which is a key Government priority. The trend in unemployment continues to be strongly and steadily downward. While still unacceptably high, unemployment has fallen from over 15% to 10.5% in only three years. Over 80,000 jobs have been created since the low point of 2012. Jobs have been created right across the economy, in virtually all sectors.

Inflation was low in 2014, with an average increase in the HICP of 0.3% for the year as a whole. Inflationary pressures are also expected to remain relatively muted in 2015, with the fall in oil prices having a major influence on this assessment.

Although Ireland's economic performance was strong in 2014 and we are expecting the economy to maintain its upward trend in 2015, there are, of course, risks attached to this benign scenario. These risks stem from both external and domestic sources. Continued low inflation in the euro area presents a risk in that it could lead households and firms to defer spending and investment. As against this, however, the ECB's recent quantitative easing announcement is to be welcomed as it should help to avert this threat as well as benefiting the Irish economy in other ways. Another risk is that if more robust growth in our main trading markets fails to materialise this could have a negative impact on our exports.

Although we are, of course, dependent on growth in our trading partners, our experience in recent years has demonstrated that the Irish economy is flexible and resilient, as well as having developed greater competitive strengths than before. I, therefore, have confidence that this increased economic strength, combined with the Government's commitment to fiscal discipline, would enable the Irish economy to cope if external growth was to be slower than expected.

Turning to the public finances, it is important to note that, since 2008, Ireland has introduced consolidation measures in the region of €30 billion, or almost 17% of GDP. These measures were strategically implemented in a manner that was in line with international best practice, that is, the majority - over 60% - of the consolidation measures have been on the expenditure side. Furthermore, in tax measures introduced during this period, the strategy has been to widen the tax base while ensuring a fair, efficient and competitive income tax system, which is essential for economic growth and job creation. The implementation of these measures has seen Ireland make significant progress in correcting the imbalances in the public finances and enabled us to consistently overachieve compared to the Excessive Deficit Procedure, EDP, fiscal targets. I am confident that the 2014 deficit target will also be met by a significant margin.

Budget 2015 targets a deficit of 2.7% of GDP for 2015, which provides a prudent buffer to achieving a GDP deficit of less than 3%. I would fully expect that the continuing revenue growth and expenditure restraint will enable Ireland to exit the Excessive Deficit Procedure in 2015.

With regard to the National Asset Management Agency, at the end of 2014 NAMA had redeemed a total of €16.6 billion in senior bonds, which represents 55% of senior bonds issued. If one includes IBRC-related bonds, total redemptions have reached €29.5 billion.

This significantly reduces the contingent liability for the State, from a possible €43 billion to €13.5 billion at year end 2014. These redemptions yield benefits in terms of the creditworthiness of the sovereign. This has been clearly stated in statements by the credit rating agencies as they have upgraded the Irish sovereign, in part, reflecting the positive impact they consider that NAMA's actual and planned accelerated disposal programme is and will continue to have on Ireland's creditworthiness. Of particular importance has been the manner in which NAMA has not just consistently met but exceeded its targets. NAMA is confident, assuming current market performance is sustained, that it will be in a position to fully repay its borrowings and hopes to achieve a surplus over its life, thus eliminating the State's contingent liability.

Deputies will be aware that the Joint Committee of Inquiry into the Banking Crisis was established last year. The Department is fully committed to supporting the work of the committee and is currently in the process of sourcing, examining and formatting the substantial number of records requested. We have already provided a substantial number of records and will continue to do so. This commitment to deliver applies equally across all areas of work in the Department. It is a knowledge-based professional organisation with enormous responsibility and accountability to deliver to its stakeholders. Changes already implemented ensure that resources are directed towards key priorities. This is complimented by the Department's investment and focus on performance management, enhancement in its IT systems, employee engagement, workforce planning and learning and development. These initiatives and developments are being managed and led by a senior management team and are actively contributed to and supported by staff.

Our change programme for 2015 is focused on continuous improvement and higher performance levels. We will continue to develop and implement underlying actions to our HR strategy to achieve our strategic goals and deliver public value. We will enhance and promote good corporate governance and compliance so that we can best deliver on our objectives in a professional, fair and balanced manner. Through collaboration with Office of Government Chief Information Officer, OGCIO, we will continue to invest in the roll-out of our ICT strategy as a key enabler to introduce innovation to and transform the way in which we work that achieves our business needs and assist us to deliver public value. We will also work with the Office of Public Works and other tenants to ensure that we maximise efficient and co-ordinated usage of our physical facilities.

The ongoing programme of economic repair, having regard to social recovery, will require that we partner and exploit synergies with our colleagues in other Departments, as well as public and private sector bodies. We will continue our strategic collaboration and partnership with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in relation to achieving our common goal of ensuring the long term sustainability of the public finances while also delivering widespread positive outcomes for all stakeholders, including citizens, businesses and public servants. My Department is fully committed to the ongoing programme of change in the Civil Service which seeks to build capacity to respond to existing and future challenges and improve the performance of the Civil Service and its staff. Strong leadership and active participation in the implementation of this programme of change will be a key focus over the period.

Turning to the business of the committee today, the funding allocation sought for the Finance group of Votes for 2015 totals €368 million and compares to a 2014 Vote group total of €358 million. This represents an increase of 3%, which is largely driven by a technical requirement to provide for 27 fortnightly payrolls in 2015 - an addition of some €9 million to the Vote group. The remainder arises because of the need to provide for additional resources in Revenue and the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which I will come back to later.

Some €31 million of the 2015 Vote group allocation provides for the administrative and non-administrative costs of the Department of Finance. This allocation is broadly unchanged compared to 2014. Almost 61% of this is provided to cover pay bills, with a further €4 million to cover facilities and non-pay administrative costs, a large portion of which is in respect of transactional pension, banking and financial management shared services. Costs will reduce in this area over the next few years as these services transition to the shared services Vote. The remainder of the gross Estimate is provided to enable the Department to widen its engagement at an international level, to be proactive in addressing policy issues and to secure a robust banking system and economic climate. As I indicated at the outset, our ongoing focus is the development of strategies to secure a functioning and sustainable macro-economic environment, which will lead to a better standard of living for our citizens, to promote domestic consumption and sustainable lending, and to continue to implement improvements within the domestic and international financial services sector.

With regard to Vote 8, the budget of the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General is applied towards a single programme with the following outputs: auditing the financial statements of public bodies and issuing audit opinions; control of issues from the Central Fund; examining and reporting on financial management arrangements in public bodies and the value for money of public services. Members will be aware that the Comptroller and Auditor General also assists the Committee of Public Accounts in its scrutiny of the public finances. Additional resources of €760,000 have been allocated to this office in 2015 to enable it to address capacity issues and a build up of work in the financial audit directorate.

On Vote 9, the Office of the Revenue Commissioners has requested a budget allocation of €329 million, an increase of €9 million or 2.8% on the 2014 net Estimate, of which 74% is related to pay for an employment ceiling of 5,874 staff. The Revenue Commissioners, as the Irish tax and customs administration, plays a vital role in our economy by collecting taxes and duties due to the State. These receipts underpin Government's capacity to meet our debt obligations and to fund vital services and facilities for society. In my Budget Statement I signalled an increase in Revenue resources as one of the elements of the corporate tax reform road map to reflect its role as competent authority and in recognition of the many changes taking place globally in corporate tax. I fully support Revenue's proactive approach in sourcing the skilled professional and technical expertise required to allow it to deliver on its challenging role. The additional provision for 2015 will provide for 20 staff for international taxation, 50 permanent staff for the local property tax project and 56 auditors in line with proposals by Revenue in its comprehensive review of expenditure.

In 2014, net tax and duty receipts increased by 3.1% over budget to €41.28 billion, the fourth successive year-on-year increase in returns to the Exchequer. Revenue also reduced total tax debt, maintained high levels of compliance for the taxes and duties under its care and management and delivered quality services to make it easier and less costly for taxpayers to voluntarily comply. As one example of the work undertaken, Revenue achieved a 95% compliance rate and collected €491 million in local property tax, including household charge arrears. This, together with timely filing and payment compliance rates of 99% for our largest business cases and 97% for medium sized business cases, is evidence of a strong compliance culture among Irish taxpayers. Furthermore, during 2014 Revenue introduced the online home renovation incentive systems. The level of home renovation incentive activity is significant with over 14,000 properties benefiting from the scheme in respect of works with a value in excess of €290 million. In addition to increasing employment and activity in the construction sector, this incentive supports legitimate trade and improves the competitiveness of legitimate contractors and enables Revenue to develop additional compliance programmes to identify and tackle shadow economy activity within the construction sector.

In its new Statement of Strategy for 2015-17, Revenue is committed to two key strategic priorities: to make it easier and less costly to voluntarily comply and to identify and confront non-compliance.

On making it easier and less costly to comply with tax and customs requirements, Revenue will promote the delivery of quality information and services, as well as the early resolution of taxpayers inquiries. To achieve this it intends to promote self-service and electronic channels as its primary service provision channels. Where electronic or self-service engagement is not a viable option, an excellent telephone service, organised around the needs of the taxpayers, will be provided.

Unfortunately non-compliance is still a feature. To support and to underpin its efforts to support voluntary compliance Revenue will confront non-compliance on a risk priority basis. Revenue intends to maximise the use of data and the deployment of analytics and risk assessment approaches to identify the incidence, scale and significance of non-compliance and to target its resources to successfully confront and overcome those risks. In this way Revenue will identify and challenge all forms of shadow economy activity, tackle organised crime activity and smuggling and confront aggressive tax and duty avoidance.

It should be noted that Revenue collaborated with a wide range of Departments and agencies on the implementation of Government policies and on the international side, Revenue has been an active contributor in the development of EU and OECD initiatives providing for the automatic exchange of information between tax administrations and the base erosion and profit shifting, BEPS, action plan. In 2014, Ireland continued to expand its network of international agreements with the signature of two new double taxation treaties, bringing the number of signed treaties in place to 72. Another example of collaboration will be the joint introduction of a new fuel marker in Ireland and the UK to counter fuel laundering. Revenue will continue to contribute to our economic recovery and support the Government's medium-term economic strategy by collecting taxes and duties as efficiently and effectively as possible.

In my Budget Statement for 2014, I also announced a reform of the role, functions and structure of the Office of the Appeal Commissioners. It is expected that legislation will be introduced in 2015 providing, inter alia, for the establishment of a new tax appeals commission. Accordingly, the proposed allocation for Vote 10 - Office of the Appeal Commissioners has been increased by €300,000, or 63%, in 2015 to reflect the part-year funding required to advance this reform.

I thank members for their attention and I commend the Revised Estimates for the Department of Finance group of Votes to the committee.

We will begin the discussion on Vote 7 - Office of the Minister for Finance.

Is there a change from monthly pay to fortnightly pay? This issue has been raised with regard to the Department of Finance and Revenue and extra costs are involved.

It is simply the way the days fall. Instead of 26 payment days there will be 27 payment days in 2015.

Travel and subsistence is approximately €585,000 and reference is made to additional ministerial visits to China, Singapore and Hong Kong. Do these relate to the IFSC?

The spend was €598,000 compared to a budget of €541,000. We have sought an allocation of €585,000 for 2015 to reflect the expenditure pressures arising from an increase in European Union and international engagements. Of this allocation, approximately €105,000 is allocated for ministerial travel, including the Minister of State and ministerial drivers. Key items of expenditure under this budget in 2014 included the Minister for Finance accompanying the President to China and being involved in separate representational work there in parallel. The costs for 2015 include provision for the Minister of State's IFSC strategy trip to the Asian Financial Forum. There is increasing engagement for all policy units, such as with regard to the World Bank, combined with reduced recoupment percentages from the European Union. There are some expenditure pressures for technical reasons.

Subhead (vi) of Vote 7 is with regard to office premises expenses. This will increase to approximately €1.4 million in 2015. Does this relate to once-off remedial work?

The spend was €347,000 in 2014 compared to an allocation of €649,000. The underspend was largely driven by a delay in progressing areas premises projects as tendering and procurement processes were required.

We have sought an allocation of €1.389 million for 2015. This reflects the expected costs of a number of remedial and health and safety works required in the Merrion Street complex in 2015. In 2014 external reports on health and safety and facilities management identifying some areas where immediate remedial work was required. A carefully-designed sequence programme of projects has been planned to address the issues raised. A major upgrading of the Government Buildings complex began in late 2014, with the move from an analogue to a digital telephone system. This project will be completed shortly with decommissioning of the analog communications room in the basement of the south block. The next project is a major upgrading of our electrical systems so we comply with business requirements and health and safety standards. This will be followed by plastering and painting to bring the accommodation to an acceptable standard. Walls have been significantly damaged by the recent work.

Underinvestment in general maintenance in recent years means worn carpets, particularly on stairs, present a specific health and safety risk. The demand on the small number of meeting rooms has become an efficient and work is planned to remodel the basement area in Nos. 7-9 Merrion Row into a suite of meeting rooms which will be used by the Departments of Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform. The last two projects will absorb a significant part of the additional budget. Additional accommodation and equipment has been provided in 2015 for the team working on the Oireachtas Banking Inquiry.

With regard to financial services policy, under subhead (vii), consultancy and other services, the actual figure for 2013 was approximately €3.5 million, the Estimate for 2014 was €6.5 million and the Estimate for 2015 is €5.6 million. Do we have a breakdown of the main elements of this?

The 2014 allocation was €6.544 million and was provided to cover a wide range of deliverables including banking sector policy, personal debt, small and medium enterprise lending, financial services reform and the cost of implementing the national payments plan project, all of which were being led by the Department. The allocation sought for 2015 is €5.62 million, a reduction of approximately €1 million. This reflects a reduction on national payments plan projects as some of them will reach a natural conclusion, the consolidation of the transformational budget under subhead E3, and reduced costs as more of the work of the SME personal debt area is completed in-house.

With regard to fiscal policy and subhead C4, concerning consultancy and other services, there is an estimate for 2015 of €850,000. The Minister said the increase was for the purpose of a new joint ESRI-Department of Finance research programme on tax policy and the macro-economy and to provide for the cost of legal defences. Could he tell us a little more about the joint research paper and why there is a need for an increase in the cost of legal defences?

The 2014 allocation was €0.575 million. It was provided to enable the unit to continue its programme of rolling reviews of tax categories and expenditures. The committee will be aware that the division has been engaged in a number of legal challenges, which will continue during 2015. If, for example, the Apple case in Europe goes the distance, there will obviously be associated legal costs. There are some other high-profile legal cases of which the Deputy will also be aware from newspaper reports.

We must provide in the Estimate for expected costs, even if the money is not spent subsequently. The figure is the best estimate of the project costs. The allocation sought for 2014 is increased to reflect the additional external expert support we expect to need and the ongoing work, and it is also to support our work as we continue to explore ways to reposition Ireland to reap the benefits of sustainable foreign direct investment and the changing international tax landscape.

The Deputy will be well aware that there is considerable international focus on corporation tax. We need to be as well informed as our competitor countries when negotiating, including with the OECD at European Commission level, particularly with the Commissioner for competition, and in respect of issues of state aid, etc. There are legal costs that have to be provisioned even though we may not spend the money subsequently.

I will leave it at that.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. I hope he is making a full recovery after his recent trip to the hospital.

I will not go over the ground covered by Deputy Michael McGrath. Page 5 refers to office equipment and external IT costs, for which over €1 million has been budgeted. Some of those costs are offset by public expenditure and reform savings. Does the Department have any plans to follow the lead of the Central Bank in outsourcing an increasing number of its IT systems? Does it intend to keep them in-house?

There are no plans at present. The systems are technically outsourced to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, which handles them for us. It is still a Department.

The Estimates for this year are as they are and the Department has no intention of going outside the Civil Service.

No. There is no major move in that regard.

Deputy Michael McGrath referred to subhead B4 and the €6.5 million for consultancy and other services. How much of that is related to advisers on the banks? What is the nature of the contracts that have been entered into, or those that are planned?

Some €4.3 million of the total the Deputy mentioned was for the banking sector, while €0.6 million was for the NPP and €0.27 million was for legislation. An example of the latter is the Central Bank Acts. A total of €0.5 million was for SME personal debt, mortgage arrears advice and services.

Regarding the €4.3 million, what types of contract were entered into?

We have re-tendered and we have appointed a panel of advisers across the areas in which we need advice. When something occurs and we need to draw on external advice, we have a competition between the advisers on the panel.

Was the €4.3 million actually spent in 2014 and not a contingency figure for legal advice, etc.? In what way was it spent on consultancy pertaining to banking in 2014? Do we have an idea where it went?

A report published on our website sets out details of costs incurred by the Department in regard to all consultancy-type expenditure from 2008 to 2013. We are updating it and we will shortly publish the 2014 report. Cumulative spending at the end of 2013 was some €22 million. That is taking 2008 as the base year, with the period extending to the end of 2014. We expect that the 2014 report will increase the cumulative figure by approximately €1.9 million. Therefore, the total is €24 million across all policy areas since 2008, which amounts to €4 million per year. During the period we recouped almost €9 million from the banking sector and will continue to pursue recoupment actively where the costs are clearly attributable to work for the sector. The net cost for seven years since 2008 is €15 million. It is netting out at slightly over €2 million per year. We have a policy of recouping everything we can from the banking sector where the costs were incurred in solving some problems in that sector.

I note from the Estimates that €1 million was recouped from the banking sector in 2014, but the Minister said €4.3 was spent on the banking sector in 2014. The subhead covers consultancy and other services, which could include legal services. What were the main items? I am not asking the Minister to tell me about every cent. Was there consultancy? Was there a large consultancy contract to examine a certain area related to the banks? Was it very much legal work? Could the Minister give us some ideas as to where the €4.3 million was spent?

The legal expenditure was €1.7 million. Many of the big companies would be involved. Arthur Cox does a significant amount of legal work for the Departments. It was paid €84,000. Various others - various barristers and individual advisers, including legal advisers - were paid.

Can we conclude that the remainder, €2.6 million, was related to consultancy?

The sum of €4.3 million was the Estimate. The actual expenditure was €1.7 million.

The actual outturn for 2014 was €1.7 million.

Yes. Owing to the forward provisioning for unexpected bills, especially legal bills, the Estimate tends to be inexact in this area. The Estimate was well ahead of the expenditure in 2014.

Under the heading the outturn is €1.7 million, so there were no consultants appointed over 2014. Is that correct? Was it all absorbed?

There were some consultants. I do not have the detail to hand but we will forward it to the Deputy.

Are the contracts all small rather than substantial?

It is a question of what is substantial these days. By comparison with the €6.5 million Estimate, the outturn is low.

I have a general question. Why are we addressing the Estimates later this year than in previous years? One big advantage of moving the budgetary cycle to October was that we would have Estimates before the commencement of expenditure. Last year we dealt with the Estimates on 15 January but we are doing so five weeks later this year. Is there a reason?

It is just a matter of the sequencing of Estimates debates. Public expenditure was covered last week. There is no particular policy position on it. I would be as happy to take the Estimates on 15 January as on 18 February.

We do not have the outturn for the Estimates for 2014 among these documents. Is there a reason for that?

We do not know until we are a little more into the year what the precise outturn is for some Votes. The calculations have not been finalised. That is the position.

I appreciate that.

Under this heading in the Estimate for this year, for which the Minister has a figure of €5.6 million, does that include a contract for somebody to review the implementation of the property tax?

Dr. Don Thornhill did the original work of scoping out the possibilities of a property tax. He was a former Secretary General in the Department of Education. He has been a distinguished public servant for a long time. We asked him to do a desktop review, to generally examine how it worked out and to make some recommendations on it. The amount of money involved would be nugatory. It would not require a special Estimate.

Is the Minister saying that it will be done in-house?

Yes. He is working on his own with the help of officials in the Revenue Commissioners and the Department. I spoke to him about it but I did not even raise the issue of a fee with him.

Can the Minister explain that to the committee? Is this person a civil servant? I am not familiar with him. Why would there be a issue over a fee?

He is a former civil servant. He was the head of the Competition Authority. The reason I asked him to do this job was that he did the original Thornhill report on the possibility of a property tax. The Deputy would be familiar with it. It was published and we discussed it at various points. It was the main piece of policy work on the property tax and it is frequently referenced. Coming into 2015, and now that the property tax is a fixed feature of our tax system, and with a collection rate of 94%, I thought it would be a good idea to have a look at it. There are issues, and I want to get advice on them. Deputy Michael McGrath is raising one issue by way of a Private Members' Bill - the revaluation date that is in the original legislation for 2016 for a new valuation base for 2017.

On the second point the Deputy raised, our provision in the tax area provides for a rolling review of all tax expenditures. Normally, they are all done in-house and with the Revenue Commissioners, but on this occasion, because Dr. Thornhill was involved in the formatting of the policy originally, I asked him to come back and have a look at it.

I presume there will not be a fee for this work?

I am working on the basis that if there is a fee it will be pretty nominal. I would not regard it as a consultant's fee.

No. I understand that. Excuse my ignorance on this, if there was a fee, which the Minister has not ruled out, how could the Department award a contract that would have a fee, regardless of the value involved, without going to public tender, given that it would be a public contract if there was a fee involved?

The are requirements with regard to public procurement but there are ceilings that one has to pass before the requirements come into play. I regard this as ongoing work. This person did some work previously. I think it was the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government that retained him originally. As he has some expertise in the area and has thought about it, I simply asked him whether he would review how the property tax is working out and whether there are any changes he thinks would be worth making. It is an issue. The Deputy has raised it a number of times and Deputy Michael McGrath has also raised it. We will see what he comes up with. If there is any cost arising, we will make a full disclosure.

I expect he will not address the issue I have with the property tax, which is that it should be scrapped - and we are committed to doing that - but I will await his report.

That would not be within his terms of reference.

I look forward to noting his terms of reference or whether there are any terms of reference, given the loose nature of the way the Minister has employed him.

Is the Deputy's party still bringing in a wealth tax, or is that off the agenda?

We are scrapping the water charges and the property tax, as the Minister will be glad to hear.

What about the wealth tax?

The real opinion on this tax will given in the next general election and people will have a choice as to whether to vote for parties that want to get rid of it, regardless of what Dr. Thornhill does in his desktop review, for which he may or may not be paid a fee, depending on the Minister's chats with him.

Is a wealth tax not a quintessential type of property tax?

What the Minister has brought in is a housing tax.

I advise the Deputy and the Minister that we are dealing with the Estimates and I ask them to stop squabbling.

Okay. To clarify this matter, the Estimate does not include the review on the property tax because it is not a clear whether a fee will be charged by Mr. Thornhill. Does the Minister have a conclusion date for that work?

It will be in medium term rather than in the long term. If we are making changes it will be in the context of the next budget.

There does not seem to be any additional money for a budgeting costing service in the documentation provided, and I thank the Minister's officials for putting forward the documentation. We raised this issue during Oral Questions to the Minister's Department. We have continuously raised it for a number of years and the Minister committed to examining the idea.

There is not a Government decision on it yet, but it is something I would like to see put in place. I have thought about it and if it is put in place it will have to be introduced gradually, before we get to the position that is the practice in other countries. We are working on a proposal-----

Will it have an impact in terms of the Estimates for 2015? Will there be an enhanced provision for it? We have the basic provision of costing individual measures with the Department on the Minister's say-so. Does he consider there could be an enhanced provision for this, which could have an impact on the Estimates for 2015?

I could see some increase in the Houses of the Oireachtas Vote, but as to whether they can contain it within their present allocation or whether they would require a Supplementary Estimate, I have not advanced my thinking enough yet to give the Deputy a direct answer on that.

That is fine.

I appreciate the time I have taken and I apologise to Deputy Boyd Barrett, who I am sure is eager to speak. I am interested in the Department's figures for ministerial representations. Does that cover any correspondence received from the public, lobbyist groups, all the budget submissions and so on? Is that what ministerial representations cover, as well as people who write asking the Minister to include measures in finance Bills and so on?

They would be letters and e-mails from the public, telephone calls, inquiries from Deputies, parliamentary questions and freedom of information requests - the whole lot.

I take it the e-mails covered under the figure would not be the normal type in which the sender is giving out to the Minister for ruining the country. Would it need to be one requesting the Minister to do a particular task to be classified as a representation?

No. We get some e-mails like that, which usually have a tricolour at the top.

Are they from the patriotic people on the Minister's side?

We are suspicious about the source. Most of the e-mails I get are to tell me what a wonderful job I am doing.

Joking aside, I assume the Minister's office gets more than 5,000 e-mails a year.

It does. They are all included in the figures that are given.

Each Deputy gets well over 5,000 e-mails per year. Are e-mails included, or must it be a submission?

E-mails that require a reply are included.

There is an automatic acknowledgement system. Some e-mails are for information purposes or, as the Deputy said, they state a view or an opinion, but the e-mails that require a reply are those that comprise the figures of 5,843 for 2012 and 5,196 for 2014.

I note the number of parliamentary questions is down by more than a 1,000.

There are new rules on parliamentary questions. There was a time when the Opposition spokesperson could table a question in the name of every colleague in his or her parliamentary party.

It is confined to a certain number now.

Is the Minister referring to Oral Questions?

That has diminished the bulk of the questions.

They are still down by-----

It is a great reform.

I do not think it has reduced the Deputies' efficiency in any way.

There are 1,800 fewer parliamentary questions than the previous year.

It is for 11 months.

It is still a major dip in regard to parliamentary questions.

The area I am most interested in is freedom of information requests. We have seen a steady decline in the number of freedom of information requests, from 265 in 2012 to 220 in 2013 and 148 to the end of November 2014. Unless there was a massive surge in December, we are going to see quite a substantial fall for 2014. I ask the Minister to comment on that and also on whether the changes to fees in the FOI legislation have had an impact, or whether there has been a spike or an increase as a result.

I do not think what happened to the fees four or five years ago has had an impact. What has had a big impact is the policy in the Department of Finance, which is to publish practically everything. We keep putting up on the website the kind of data that, historically, was requested under freedom of information. A lot of the queries come from journalists and, as the information is on the website, they do not have to get it under FOI. That would be the big change.

Does the Minister have information as to the largest fee the Department charged under FOI last year?

That might be a parliamentary question I will table.

The officer is independent of the Minister.

I remind members we are finishing at 7 p.m. I call Deputy Boyd Barrett.

I have specific questions on the particular subheads but, more generally, the Minister mentioned that the Department has expended some extra money looking at the property tax. Is that correct?

What I said is that Mr. Don Thornhill did some work previously, when the property tax was being introduced. Effectively, we published the paper in which he scoped out an approach to introducing a property tax. I have asked him to come back in now to review how it is working and to make recommendations on the perceived difficulties.

And the Minister subcontracted a bit of work to Deputy Michael McGrath as well.

He has his own Bill but he is identifying one of the areas that Mr. Thornhill is looking at.

Has the Minister looked at, or does he intend to put any resources into looking at, something that we and others have raised in the context of wealth taxes, namely, wealth distribution? While I do not know what the Minister's view is, there has been much dispute and debate about where wealth is distributed. Has he thought at all about allocating some resources to-----

Work has been done - it was published three or four weeks ago - on wealth distribution in Ireland. With regard to the work published yesterday, either it was misleading or people used the basic research to mislead, because they talked about wealth distribution in Ireland being the most unequal in Europe. Then there was a footnote to say that, of course, when we take social welfare transfers and the tax system into account, it is bang on the European average. How one could do a serious piece of research and have that down as a line at the end-----

I will not get into the political debate now, although I am sure we will have that debate again. A lot of that has to do with income. A particular area to which, it seems to me, it would be worth allocating resources is examining the distribution of wealth in terms of financial wealth and assets. Certainly, when issues such as a wealth tax are raised, one of the standard responses is that we do not really know how or where that wealth is distributed. The figures we get from the Central Bank show how much household wealth there is and how it has dramatically increased in recent years, which leads some of us to believe, given that everybody else has seen their income or their wealth fall, that it must be concentrated somewhere. The Minister disputes that. Is the Minister considering allocating any resources to look at the distribution of wealth and assets?

Does the Minister think he should?

Is it of no interest to the Minister if there is a heavy concentration of wealth in a small number of hands?

There are some private sector studies in the area, and anything in the macroeconomics area is of interest. However, I am not commissioning work in the Department of Finance.

I would strongly suggest that the Minister do that. If we ever get the chance, we will.

With regard to expenses pertaining to office premises, the 2014 estimate was €649,000 and the 2015 estimate is €1,389,000. That is a big jump, almost a doubling of expenses. What is the reason for that?

The spend in 2014 was €374,000, and that is compared to an allocation of €649,000. The underspend was driven largely by a delay in progressing various premises projects, as tendering and recruitment processes are required. There is an allocation of €1,389,000 for 2015 and a lot of the added expenditure comes from health and safety considerations. Before the Deputy came in, I read the full note.

I do not understand it. Health and safety considerations have increased the total from €394,000 in 2014 to €1,389,000 in 2015?

With the permission of the Chairman, I will re-read the note, but I have put it on the record already. In 2014, external reports on health and safety and facilities management identified some areas where immediate remedial work was required. A carefully designed and sequenced programme of projects has been planned to address the issues raised. A major upgrading of the Government Buildings complex began in late 2014, with the move from an analogue to a digital telephone system. This project will be completed shortly, with decommissioning of the analogue communications room in the basement of the south block. The next project is a major upgrading of our electrical systems to ensure that we comply with business requirements and health and safety standards. This will be followed by plastering and painting to bring the accommodation to an acceptable standard. Walls have been significantly damaged by the recent work.

Under-investment in general maintenance in recent years means that worn carpets, particularly on stairs, present a specific health and safety risk, and also a legal risk. The demand on the small number of meeting rooms has become inefficient, and work is planned to remodel the basement area in Nos. 7-9 Merrion Row as a suite of meeting rooms which will be used by the Departments of Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform. The last two projects will absorb a significant part of the additional budget.

It does seem like a big jump from €394,000 in 2014 to €1,389,000 in 2015.

We are moving to a position in which significant work will be carried out in 2015 rather than the routine care and maintenance work that was done in 2014 because of tendering and procurement requirements.

Okay. Subhead C4 deals with consultancy services. There is a jump from €161,000 in 2013 to €575,000 in 2014 and then to €850,000 in 2015.

The Deputy is asking the Minister to repeat himself again, as Deputy Michael McGrath asked the same question earlier.

If you want we can add it on.

For clarity on that.

The allocation was €0.575 million. That was provided to enable the unit to continue its programme of rolling reviews of tax categories and expenditures. In addition to the above, the committee will be aware that the division has been engaged in a number of legal challenges which will continue in 2015. The allocation sought for 2015 is increased to reflect the additional external expert support we expect to need in the ongoing work as we explore ways to reposition Ireland to reap the benefits of the sustainable foreign direct investment and the changing international tax landscape. Our provision in the tax area provides for a rolling review of tax expenditures. Members are well aware of the new international focus on corporation tax and we want to ensure we are fully informed and fully equipped when negotiating with the Commission and OECD and various partner countries.

One could construe that in a different way, which is that we are paying a fortune to consultants to ensure that multinational corporations do not have to pay any more tax because of the international focus on this country

I ask the Deputy to stick to issues.

I am. I am saying that we are seeing a significant increase in the expenditure on consultants essentially around protecting a low tax regime for corporations. We are spending taxpayers' money to ensure that mostly foreign multinationals pay a very low rate of tax. Is that why these consultants are being employed?

It is the opposite, we are defending our tax policies, in court if necessary, to ensure that our tax base is not eroded.

I would question that expenditure because we are spending taxpayers' money - taxpayers who do pay a high proportion of their income in tax - to ensure the multinationals, who pay a very low proportion of profits on tax, continue to pay a low proportion of their profits in tax. We are increasing the public subsidy of maintaining low taxes on multinational corporations. That is a gross waste of money and it would be far better, if we do have to employ consultants, to employ consultants doing something useful which might benefit the Irish taxpayer. It is noteworthy that there was a significant increase in that regard.

Our job as a committee is to monitor expenditure. On the consultancy services on page 23, provision of shared services subhead E1, there was an increase to €490,000 in 2014 and €1.85 million in 2015. Could the Minister outline the reason for this?

The allocation of this subhead in 2014 was €490,000 compared to an increased allocation of €1.85 million in 2015. A number of factors drove this. I am taking on board the committee members' comments last year that the transformation in the reform budget for the Department should be centralised. It is centralised in this subhead. We have also made provision for costs associated with the significant work that is expected to be conducted by the Banking Inquiry. The subhead also provides for ongoing projects such as risk policy, fiscal transparency and other reforms.

It is a big jump. I hope it gets a result.

It is the consolidation of the budget.

I summarise from the Office of the Minister for Finance administrative subheadings, 1 to 7. Programme A - European Union and international policy. Subheads A1 - administration pay; A2 - administration non-pay; A3 - consultancy and other services, key outputs, output targets and context and impact indicators. Programme B - the financial services policy. Subhead B1 - administration pay; B2 - administration non-pay; B3 - committees and commissions; B4 - consultancy and other services, key outputs, output targets and context and impact indicators. Any further comments?

Turning to Programme C - Fiscal policy. Subheads C1 - administration pay; C2 - administration non-pay; C3 - committees and commissions; C4 - consultancy and other services; key outputs, output targets and context and impact indicators. Any further comments?

Programme D - Economic policy. Subheads D1 - administration pay; D2 - administration non-pay; D3 - consultancy and other services, key outputs, output targets, and context and impact indicators. Any other comments?

Programme E - Provisional shared services. Subheads E1 - administration pay; E2 - administration non-pay; E3 - consultancy and other services, key outputs, output targets and context and impact indicators. Any comments?

I will now turn to Vote 8 - Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

I will clarify. I am putting all the questions I have that relate to the Vote, including the outputs, in my block of time.

I have a couple of points to raise with the Minister on Vote 8, the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General. There is an increase in the budget for 2015 which appears to relate to the recruitment of some additional staff. In the notes we have, there is a reference to a build-up of arrears of some reports that have not been completed, presumably because of a lack of staff on the reporting side. Could the Minister provide some details on that? Are these special reports from the Comptroller and Auditor General's office that we have not been able to conclude because of the lack of staff on the reporting side? How many people are we sanctioned to take on? I believe it is the region of 15 whole-time equivalents, if I am reading this correctly. Could the Minister provide more detail on the increase in the budget for 2015 around staffing and where the bottleneck is? Will he also outline what has not been achieved because of the reduction in numbers in recent years?

The Comptroller and Auditor General reports every year. If the Deputy looks at the number of reports produced he will see there has been a falling away from when it was at its peak. There were 55 reports published in 2009. In 2010 there were 54 published, in 2011 there were 50 published, in 2012 there were 31 published, in 2013 there were 30 published and in 2014 there were 25. The Comptroller and Auditor General has identified over 130 matters which warrant additional examination outside the financial audit affray. In addition, it is necessary that the office has sufficient resources to respond in a timely manner to emerging issues such as those raised by whistleblowers.

I fully concur it must be properly resourced. When we were in office we did not have that number of reports per year that the Comptroller and Auditor General did not complete. The Minister gave an outline of the number that has been reducing over the last years and referred to about 130 matters that the Comptroller and Auditor General would wish to investigate. The note we have on staffing says that the staffing complement sanctioned by public expenditure for 2015 is 164 whole-time equivalents and there are currently 149 staff serving. The Minister said there are eight whole-time equivalents sanctioned.

Eight on the reporting side, 14 altogether.

There has been a significant fall off in activity by the Comptroller and Auditor General in terms of special reports. Will the Minister put on record the number of reports for each year, specifying if they are special reports and-----

Clearly the Comptroller and Auditor General has to carry out his statutory work first and complete all the audits. I will list the reports published in each year, starting in 2009. I will give the publishing dates rather than the dates the work was done. Some 55 reports were published in 2009; 54 in 2010; 50 in 2011; 31 in 2012; 30 in 2013; and 25 in 2014. My note states that he has identified 130 matters.

Does the Comptroller and Auditor General wish to conduct a report into that number of matters?

He has identified 130 matters. I have an appendix which gives the arrears cases. In 2011 and 2012 there are still three clients, Inland Fisheries, National College of Art and Design and County Cork VEC where the reports have not yet issued. In 2012, there are 16 clients that have not been reported on. These include Dublin Dental Hospital; National Museum of Ireland; Grand Canal Harbour management; County Limerick VEC; HSE patient private property account; Bord Altranais and Cnáimhseachais na hÉireann; Family Support Agency; Fishery Harbour Centres; University of Limerick; UCD; Trinity College; NUI Galway; Dublin City University; Waterford Institute of Technology; the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority; and the National Gallery - combined accounts. In general the reasons for the delay are a combination of one or more of the following: delays in accounts production, significant accounting errors that require adjustment, or account format problems. In some cases such accounting errors relate to capacity problems and changes in systems in the client bodies that arise in regard to the establishment or dissolution of bodies. Another reason is delays in the provision to the audit team of complete explanations with the necessary back-up evidence in response to queries raised on audit. A third reason is requests by the audit team for additional disclosure in the notes to the financial statements or in the statement of internal financial control to ensure a balanced complete and understandable assessment of the bodies position is given. There are more complex matters, such as reputation or consideration by the Comptroller and Auditor General of reports on accounting propriety and regulatory concerns. Finally, there is the unavailability of audit resources to respond promptly when explanations are provided. In a few cases, significantly delayed audits are being progressed with the subsequent year's audit. In most cases, prior year uncompleted audits have a knock-on effect on the audits for the subsequent years. It is under-resourced.

The facts are alarming. I agree with the Minister that the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General is under-resourced and the drop-off in activity from the 55 reports published in 2009 to 25 reports published last year, a reduction of more than 50%, is worrying and is due presumably in the main to a lack of resources. Clearly that will have implications in terms of governance and value for money for the bodies that the Comptroller and Auditor General is working with.

The fact that a number of report relating to 2011 have not yet been concluded in February 2015 is a concern. That is not all resource related. Some of the reasons for these reports not being completed were outlined. This warrants attention and I am glad the Minister is providing some extra resources but there is a significant build-up of issues, with 130 matters that require examination. If we have the capacity to provide more resources then we should do so because from my experience on the Committee of Public Accounts the State gets a very good return from the work of the Comptroller and Auditor General in the medium to long-term as because savings are identified and achieved.

I have another point to raise on this Vote. May I query the appropriations-in-aid? The Comptroller and Auditor General will charge almost €6 million in audit fees which are remaining at the 2014 level. I appreciate that because he is dealing with State bodies and Departments where the charges are circular in nature as the money is being taken from one arm of the State to the other. What is the procedure for reviewing the rates being charged by the Comptroller and Auditor General to the bodies that it audits? How does it happen? Is it periodic? What is the review mechanism for dealing with it?

There is a check on that. They check the time and they check the per diem. It is checked periodically.

How often is periodically?

In cycles of two to three years.

I have two issues. This Vote is not best suited to be under the Department of Finance and should be under the Department of Public Expenditure. Will the Minister explain the reason that the Vote of the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General is under the Department of Finance, as opposed to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform?

My advice is that it is linked to the Central Fund. The Central Fund linkage means the Department of Finance would be the appropriate Department. The two Departments were one Department until the formation of the last Government. Effectively the Secretaries General got together and decided what duties would be allocated to which Department. Some of them are clear, such as expenditure items which are under the remit of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. There were policy calls on which would be the most appropriate Department and this was assigned to the Department of Finance.

Has the Minister considered the designation?

I had not thought about it all until the Deputy raised the matter.

It is more an expenditure issue than savings. The only other issue I had has been dealt with in great detail - Deputy McGrath raised the decrease in the number of published reports. Staff are being recruited, which is to welcomed. How many additional personnel did the office seek? We know that 14 staff are being provided.

The Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General seems to have got what it asked for, unusually.

Has it indicated targets for the output of reports? Are we likely to see how we will measure the work of the additional staff?

It would be inappropriate for me to ask. The Comptroller and Auditor General is a constitutional officer. He is independent in the exercise of his functions. He does not report to me, he reports to the Committee of Public Accounts. The Deputy's colleagues on the committee will be in a position to raise the series of issues other than lack of resources, which may be inhibiting the production of reports. There is room for a discussion at a meeting of the committee.

There should be no issue in terms of lack of resources or at least there has been no request for additional resources that have been denied to the Comptroller and Auditor General.

My view is that it is a constitutional office which needs to be funded so that it can carry out its constitutional functions. Any attempt to restrain it would be an interference with a constitutional officeholder. Within reason we are very sympathetic to requests.

We now turn to Vote 8 - Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General administrative subheads 1 to 9, programme A - audit and reporting. Subhead A1 and A2 relate to administration, pay and non-pay. Are there any comments? No. On the question of outputs and output targets, context and impact indicators, are there any comments? No. With regard to appropriations-in-aid, are there any comments? No.

We turn now to Vote 9, Office of the Revenue Commissioners.

In regard to Revenue, the stand-out issue, as far as I can see, is the addition of 80 compliance and international tax staff and the recruitment of full-time staff for local property tax work. I am particularly interested in the issue of international tax and the additional staff that are being recruited there to deal with compliance. Could the Minster provide us with more detail on exactly what those individuals will be working on? Is it related to any specific compliance project that the Revenue is undertaking? Will the HSB issue fall within that ambit?

In my Budget Statement I signalled an increase in Revenue reserves as one of the elements of the corporate tax reform roadmap which would reflect Revenue's role as a competent authority and recognise the many changes taking place globally in corporate tax. I fully support Revenue's proactive approach in sourcing the skilled professionals and technical expertise required to allow it to deliver on the challenging role it has. I believe there were only two people in that division of Revenue. As so much foreign direct investment is coming into Ireland now a staff complement of two, no matter how expert, was insufficient to service the level of inquiries dealing with the corporate sector. As the sector is growing rapidly, there is even greater pressure. One of the statements made by the Government on budget day was to the effect that the corporate tax roadmap would reflect the role of Revenue as the competent authority for corporation tax and that the Government would staff it to the level that it believed was required. It was another area that was totally under-resourced and there were bottlenecks emerging as a result of that. Since my days as Chair of the PAC I have found as a general rule of thumb that extra staff in Revenue usually pay for themselves.

Will the additional people joining this area within Revenue be dealing with the European Commission investigation into Apple?

The Department of Finance is responsible for the policy side and the Revenue Commissioners are responsible for the tax side. The Department of Finance has retained counsel to represent it and to advise it; it is awaiting the adjudication of the European Commission now on the Apple case. The Department has made it clear that if the European Commission find against Apple it will contest it in the courts. The case could be before the courts for three years before there is a final result, with all the attendant legal expenses that entails.

Has there been any indication from the Commission as to when there will be a decision on the investigation?

It has said that it will issue a finding by the end of the second quarter of this year but it may be sooner than that.

The Minister said recently he was confident that the investigation would be dropped; is he still confident of that position based on the interaction his Department has had with the European Commission?

There is a new Commissioner, Margrethe Vestager, who was finance Minister for Denmark for a number of years. She took up office on 1 January. One of her statements was to the effect that there would be a ruling by the end of the second quarter. I do not want to engage with her as she is in a quasi-judicial position at present. We will wait to see what happens. We have made our policy position quite clear. Given the Apple rulings made in the 1990s, the case against Apple is a case against Ireland. We believe that the case is weak and that it involves an element of the retrospective application of the law. In one part of the Commission's submission, it criticises Revenue because protocols that were only put in place in 2010 were not applied when the Commission had its earlier interchange of views with Apple.

Is there much contact between the Department, Revenue, and the European Commission? Is the contact intensive or ongoing?

Initially there was a lot of contact. There is less contact now because we are moving towards a point where the Commission has announced that it is going to make a decision. As it is quasi-judicial in nature I do not want to try to influence it. We have said what we wanted to say and we have made our formal submissions. That is the position now. We will see what happens. Apple's present practices are different so any finding now would only be of historic value.

The jobs are in Cork.

That is where we want them to stay. Under the headings of administration and odd pay, suphead (a)(2)(5), the issue of office equipment and external IT services, there is a significant increase for Revenue of about €6 million in 2015, up to about €52.5 million, relating mainly to expenditure on IT. The Minister referred to a series of urgent projects which will ensure that the tax system supports changes introduced by the Government under EU guidelines. The Minister is providing €30 million for external resources to assist the Revenue staff in meeting the required timelines for these projects. What kind of projects are being referred to here? These are very large sums of money.

I will read the note:

Local property tax needed to be implemented within a very aggressive timeframe due to the economic situation at the time and the priorities set by both the Government and the troika. As a result, a number of other key projects needed to be deferred. The additional €5 million spent on external resources ensured that Revenue was able to regain lost time on these deferred implementations. These included mandatory projects such as the EU mandated VAT MOSS project, the diesel rebate scheme project introduced in the 2013 budget, and the FATCA tax project required to support the intergovernmental agreement signed between the US and Ireland in December 2012. In addition, some strategic corporate programmes were also postponed, including projects to aid debt collection and identify fraud.

I welcome the Minister's comments as former Chair of the PAC. There is a 19% increase for training and development. Where has that taken place? Revenue's submission was that the 125 additional staff that would be employed within Revenue and would result in the recoupment of approximately €100 million to the tax payer. Can the Minister clarify, in terms of the training and development? Are certain Revenue staff members being upskilled and then new staff being employed at lower grades to replace them?

In 2014 a total of 16,978 internal training days were delivered to staff. In addition to that, a total of 77 Revenue students graduated from the University of Limerick; 19 students were conferred with BA (honours) in Applied Taxation and a further 56 were conferred with Diploma in Applied Taxation. Two students graduated with a corporate MBA. In addition, 46 Revenue students were conferred by the Institute of Taxation; 27 students were conferred with the tax technician qualification; and 15 students received a certificate in income tax and payroll compliance. A further four students graduated with the AITI Chartered Tax Advisor CTA. They are the highlights of the training. There were not many days of in-house training but there is a formal graduate programme as well through the University of Limerick.

What are the overall numbers of Revenue staff in 2014 and 2015?

I will check that now for the Deputy.

It appears that there has been a substantial increase from 5,714 in 2014 to 5,874 in 2015.

On 1 January 2014 there were 5,745 staff serving in Revenue while on 1 January 2015 the figure was 5,647. There has been a significant decrease. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform has authorised 5,874 Revenue staff for 2015 but on the 1 January this year there were only 5,647 staff.

Can the Minister explain why Revenue is operating at 227 staff below its allowance and has fewer staff than last year?

In addition to that there are approximately 180 temporary staff, which are not represented in these figures.

With regard to 2014, does the figure of 5,745 only account for permanent staff?

I believe so, yes. I will refer to my note. Revenue is currently engaged in running open competitions at assistant principal level for a panel of tax professionals and two ICT specialists. These competitions have been advertised nationally and on the Public Appointment Service website. Recruitment competitions for principal officer, data analyst, administrative officer, compliance and ICT, and Executive Officer, compliance, are planned for the first six months of 2015. The number of posts to be filled will depend on critical vacancies arising, projected business needs and the number of posts that can be filled through redeployment and from internal promotion panels. Overall, Revenue expects to fill around 400 posts from open competitions that have been advertised in 2014 and 2015. All of Revenue's open competitions will be advertised nationally. That does not exactly answer the Deputy's question. At the end of 2014 there were 140 temporary staff in addition to the figures given already.

So at the end of 2014 there were 5,745 permanent staff and 140 temporary staff. Does the estimate of 5,874 staff in 2015 comprise of temporary and permanent staff or only permanent staff?

It is full-time staff and in addition there would be approximately another 100 temporary staff.

It is confusing. The Minister has said that at the end of 2014 there were 5,745 permanent staff and approximately 140 temporary staff; that means there were 5,885 staff. However, the Minister has suggested that at the start of 2015 there were 5,647 staff. Did everybody leave after Christmas?

It is confusing.

I will ask the Minister about policy instead of the numbers and he can provide the numbers to the committee at a later stage.

The figures I have been given now is that at the end of 2014 there were 5,745 staff. On the 1 January 2014 there were 5,745 staff serving in Revenue and on the 1 January 2015 there were 5,647. There were an additional 140 temporary staff on top of that figure of 5,745. I believe the Deputy is asking whether the figure for 2015 will be bigger than that of 2014 when one takes account of both permanent and temporary staff.

It appears that there has been a significant decrease in staff. With regard to the local property tax, has the Minister identified whether the cost of administering it has increased or decreased? I understand that the Revenue Commissioners have initiated court proceedings against 500 individuals; is there an estimation of the cost of administering the local property tax?

In 2014 the provisional outturn was €19.738 million. The set-up costs were €26.397 million but now that it is a going concern the costs will be reduced.

How many staff are tied up in that?

In 2014 there were approximately 220, including temporary staff.

So there are 220 people working on the local property tax and only two people working on international tax. Is that correct?

Yes, there is a big discrepancy in the numbers working in international tax.

The Minister's note says that there will be recruitment of additional compliance staff, including staff to administer the local property tax. Will there be an increase in the number of staff working on the local property tax?

Staff were pulled in from various parts of the Revenue to start up the local property tax. I will refer to my note. The multi-annual pay ceiling provides for an annual average whole time equivalent of 5,874 staff. This represents an increase of approximately 166 whole time equivalents on Revenue's 2014 employment control framework figure of 5,784. The additional provision for staff in 2015 comprises 20 staff for base erosion and profit shifting, 50 permanent staff for the local property tax project and 56 auditors, in line with proposals for Revenue in the Comprehensive Review of Expenditure.

The Deputy has asked whether the 50 staff mentioned in the briefing note for the local property tax are in addition to the 220. It was staffed on the basis of temporary staff for a while. There are approximately 100 temporary staff there. That figure will be reduced and those staff will be replaced by permanent staff. The number will not increase. Temporary staff will be replaced by permanent staff.

Can the Minister clarify whether the figure of 220 staff who administer the local property tax comprises of both permanent and temporary staff, or only permanent staff with another 120 temporary staff on top of that figure?

I have been assured that 220 is the total figure.

The total figure is 220 and 100 of those will be removed and replaced by 50 permanent staff.

Yes, 50 permanent staff.

That will mean there will be fewer people working-----

It is an ongoing project. The start-up costs and the start-up staffing levels are higher.

That means there will be approximately 50 fewer people working on local property tax. Is that correct?

I refer to international tax, on which Deputy Michael McGrath touched. Is that in regard to the 20 BEPS or are there other-----

The international sector coming into the country needs a contact point in the Revenue Commissioners and they had it, but it was a unit with two head of staff who could reply to its queries. That has been beefed up.

In regard to the local property tax, I am told there are 130 full-time and 90 temporary staff, which gives 220. Some of the temporary staff are being taken out and extra full-time staff are being put in. The ratio is 2:1. The cohort is going down now that it is becoming more a matter of administration rather than putting a new project in place, as was the case in the first instance..

In terms of international tax, are we talking about the IFSC and foreign direct investment? Two people have been operating in that division in Revenue out of 5,500 people.

That would be the contact point. The Revenue has a collection unit which is separate and to which capital taxes come in. There is also a large cases division which deals directly with the corporates. However, I will get the Deputy a more detailed note on it.

Would the large cases division or the international tax division look at Apple, for example, where a ruling was made and not revisited for 14 years?

Both would be involved.

We have only two people in this division despite the number of multinational companies here and, more importantly, the amount of funds flowing through the International Financial Services Centre, which are not landing here at all. I will not labour the point but it speaks volumes that we have 220 people looking after the local property tax and two people looking after international tax.

Were the resources of Revenue and the fact there are only two people in the international section the reason this member state did not pursue HSBC, as other member states did, through an illegal avenue in terms of what it was involved in?

HSBC tax issues date back to 2010, which was before my period of time in office. I am not familiar with the details of it. However, my understanding of it from newspaper reports was that three cases were legally pursued by Revenue. I think one of them went to sanctions.

I am advised a detailed report on offshore accounts held with HSBC is being prepared by the Revenue Commissioners for the Committee of Public Accounts but, in the meantime, I can provide the following information. Information on offshore account holders in HSBC Switzerland came into the possession of the French authorities in December 2009. The Revenue Commissioners wrote to the relevant French fiscal authorities in March 2010 when they became aware that the French Government may have obtained information in regard to bank accounts held with HSBC Bank, Geneva. That communication expressed an interest in any such information which related to Irish residents and requested that the French authorities exchange this information under the provisions of the Ireland-France double taxation agreement and EU mutual assistance arrangements.

On 23 June 2010, the French authorities responded positively to this request and provided details to Revenue in regard to bank accounts purported to be held with HSBC Bank, Geneva, which had been linked to Irish nationals or to addresses in Ireland. The receipt of this information was referred to in Revenue's 2010 annual report.

On receipt of the data Revenue undertook an assessment and evaluation process which indicated that no further liability arose in the State in a number of cases. It should be noted that the existence of a foreign bank account is not evidence of tax evasion. No liability will arise where relevant taxes are paid on the funds in the bank account and any interest accruing in the account.

To date, Revenue has initiated 33 investigations as a direct result of the data received. As result of these investigations, 20 settlement payments were made, of which four were made be legal entities. Overall, the total amount recovered to date as a result of these investigations and subsequent settlements is €4,559,371 million while a further €174,442 has been received in payments on account in two ongoing investigations.

On the basis of data provided by the French authorities and the subsequent investigations conducted, Revenue also took action in any case where sufficient admissible evidence was available to bring criminal prosecution in regard to any identify tax offences. To date, three persons have been convicted of such offences and fines ranging from €4,000 to €25,000 have been imposed by the courts. A further case remains under criminal investigation.

Revenue deployed the resources necessary to evaluate and assess the information provided in regard to HSBC account holders and to subsequently undertake investigations and prosecutions that followed. Revenue officials who were involved in this investigation were concurrently involved in other investigations. It is not, therefore, possible to disaggregate the time and resources involved in the investigation.

I thank the Minister of putting that on the record. Much of that is the same information the Minister put on the record when I raised this issue with him in October 2013 in a parliamentary question. My question was not in regard to Revenue pursuing those whose information came to light as result of the whistle-blower giving the French authorities the information, but was about the fact we only have two personnel in the international tax division. Was that a factor in this country's decision not to pursue the entity - HSBC - through the courts, as other member states of the European Union are currently doing?

Is there any reason we did not do it?

I cannot really speak for my predecessor in office.

They are pursuing it now.

He acted on advice at the time. The Committee of Public Accounts has asked for a report from Revenue, which it is preparing. It will send it to the committee-----

On Tuesday, Spanish Finance Minister Montoro asked for a study on the legal actions that can be taken against HSBC for its participation in this scheme. This is on the Minister's desk. He can take legal action like that which Spain is considering.

It is partly on my desk because the Committee of Public Accounts has decided to inquire into it and has requested a full report from Revenue, which it is preparing. We will, no doubt, get it eventually.

The Minister has not closed the door on taking legal action against it.

No. I have not closed any door.

I welcome that.

My last question is on staff numbers in the large cases division. Does the Minister have the numbers for 2014 and 2015?

Some 214 is the target allocation and 203.6 are serving.

Some 214 is the target for the large cases division while 203.6 are serving. What is the estimate for 2015? Will the number go up or down?

I am told it will go up.

Perhaps some of those figures can be presented to the committee at a later stage.

In regard to the Deputy's previous question, seemingly at the end of 2014, the full figure in Revenue was 5,648 plus 140 temporary staff, giving a grand total of 5,788. For 2015, the figure is 5,874 plus 50 temporary staff, giving a total of 5,924. There will be a substantial increase in numbers.

We said we would conclude at 7 p.m.

We have a number of options, one of which is to revisit this on another day.

I have just one quick question.

Will we extend the meeting for half an hour and try to finish all of the business?

It will take less time than that. In the context of the deployment of staff and resources in the Revenue Commissioners, I am interested in how much resources are deployed in chasing after what one might call the big corporate avoiders, the big fish as against those who have not paid their property tax. Rather than go through all of that now, could the Minister provide a breakdown of the divvying up of staff resources for the different sections or categories within Revenue?

The Deputy is seeking a note on compliance and the resources allocated to different tax heads. Is that correct?

I can certainly get that information for the Deputy.

As there are no further comments on Vote 9 we will move on to Vote 10, Office of the Appeal Commissioners. Does anyone wish to comment on this Vote?

I have one quick question for the Minister. The change to this Vote seems to relate to the proposed establishment of the new tax appeals commission. When does the Minister expect that commission to be established for the purposes of these Estimates? Presumably, it will be operational for part of the year, subject to the legislation being passed.

I hope to get the legislation through the Houses during the first half of this year and once we have the legal authority, we will move immediately to reform the Office of the Appeal Commissioners. Change is envisaged with regard to issues like the method of appointment, which was solely a ministerial function up to now, as well as the number of commissioners. The intention is to have a third appeal commissioner. I believe the heads of the Bill have already been supplied to the committee.

I am happy that the establishment of a new body justifies the increase shown.

As there are no further comments on Vote 10, I thank the Minister and his officials for assisting the committee in its consideration of the 2015 Revised Estimates.

I thank the Chairman, the committee staff and the Deputies who contributed to the meeting this evening.

Top
Share