John McGuinness
Question:204 Mr. McGuinness asked the Minister for Finance the revenues that would have been lost if VAT on house purchases had not been increased in Budget 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26896/06]
View answerWednesday, 5 July 2006
Questions (201, 202)
Written answers
I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that it is not possible to furnish precise figures of the VAT take on house purchases, as the information sought on VAT returns does not require the yield from particular sectors of trade to be identified. However, based on data published by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the estimated additional net VAT yield from the sale of new houses (including apartments) as a result of the VAT rate of 12.5% being increased to 13.5% on 1 January 2003 is as follows: €115.6m in 2003; €144.3m in 2004; and, €151.5m in 2005.
A decrease of 1% in the reduced VAT rate would cost the Exchequer €358m per annum. Such a reduction would have little or no impact on the price of new houses but would be very costly to the Exchequer.
John McGuinness
Question:205 Mr. McGuinness asked the Minister for Finance the yield from the two per cent insurance levy in 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26897/06]
View answerA 2% stamp duty is charged on most non-life insurance premiums and is part of the normal stamp duty system. The exceptions are re-insurance, voluntary health insurance, marine, aviation and transit insurance and export credit insurance. It was introduced in 1982.
The yield in 2005 is €90.8m.
The purpose of the non-life levy is to broaden the stamp duty base while maintaining low direct tax rates.