Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 3 March 2004
193 Dr. Upton asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 240 of 4 February 2004, the criteria by which one spouse is deemed to be the assessable spouse; and the position regarding his contacts with the Revenue Commissioners further to this parliamentary question. [7116/04]
View answerThe concept of "assessable spouse" was introduced with effect from 6 April 1993. Prior to that date, the husband was assessed on both his own income and his wife's income. Since 6 April 1993, the legal position distinguishes couples married prior to 6 April 1993 from couples married after that date. These changes were introduced in Finance Act 1993 and responded to recommendations made by the Second Commission on the Status of Women.
For couples married prior to 6 April 1993, the position as at 6 April 1993 prevails, that is, the husband remains the person responsible for fulfilling the couples tax obligations unless the couple subsequently elect jointly for the other spouse to be the assessable spouse. For couples married on or after 6 April 1993, unless there is a claim for separate assessment or separate treatment, the couple is deemed to have elected for joint assessment, and the spouse with the greater income will be the assessable spouse. The key criterion, therefore, for deeming one spouse to be the assessable spouse is the amount of income, that is, the spouse with the greater income will be the assessable spouse. However, the couple may jointly elect for either one of them to be the assessable spouse.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in practice, where one spouse is a PAYE taxpayer and the other spouse is a self-assessment taxpayer, the self-assessment taxpayer is usually considered to be the assessable spouse. The main reason for this is that the self assessment taxpayer is likely to have more onerous responsibilities as regards tax matters e.g. record keeping, returns, preliminary tax etc., than the PAYE taxpayer.
I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that they have not completed their consideration of the feasibility of the administrative arrangements referred to in my reply to Parliamentary Question No. 240 of 4 February 2004, and, given the range of issues to be considered, it may be some time before their deliberations are completed.
