Written Answers Nos. 227 - 249
227. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Finance the extent to which capital acquisitions tax and/or capital gains tax is payable on compensation received on foot of a compulsory purchase order and the operation thresholds of applicable; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6873/13]
View answerI am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that in the absence of specific details it is only possible to reply to your query in general terms as follows:
Capital Gains Tax
A chargeable gain arising on the disposal of an asset on foot of a compulsory purchase order is liable to capital gains tax in the same way as any other disposal, subject to a minor variation as to when the time of disposal is deemed to occur.
Under Section 542(1)(c) of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, the time of disposal in the case of a disposal made on foot of a compulsory purchase is the earlier of: (i) the time the authority possessing compulsory purchase powers enters on the land in pursuance of its powers, or, (ii) the time at which the compensation for the acquisition of the land is agreed or otherwise determined (variations on appeal being disregarded for this purpose).
While the time of disposal is fixed as above, where the date of receipt of the compensation from the authority is later than this, any chargeable gain is deemed to accrue at the time at which payment of the compensation is received by the property owner – and payment of any capital gains tax due is determined by reference to this later date. If in such cases the owner of the land dies before the compensation is received, the gain is deemed to accrue immediately before the person’s death.
The first €1,270 of total chargeable gains in any year of assessment is exempt.
Capital Acquisitions Tax
Capital acquisitions tax is payable on a taxable gift or inheritance. If the proceeds of a compulsory acquisition were gifted or inherited, then capital acquisitions tax would be payable by reference to the normal criteria and thresholds, depending on the relationship between the parties. If on a gift or inheritance of agricultural property CAT agricultural relief is claimed by a farmer donee/successor (such that the value of the land is reduced by 90% for the purposes of calculating any CAT payable) and that land is subsequently acquired by compulsory purchase within 6 years of the gift or inheritance, the agricultural relief claimed on the gift or inheritance will be withdrawn unless the proceeds of the compulsory purchase are reinvested in other agricultural property within 6 years of the compulsory purchase (there is provision for partial withdrawal where only part of the proceeds are reinvested).
The first €3,000 of the total taxable value of all taxable gifts taken by a donee in any calendar year is exempt.
228. Deputy Patrick O'Donovan asked the Minister for Finance the cost to the Exchequer of reducing the rate of VAT by 2%; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6879/13]
View answerI am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that, assuming the rate of VAT being referred to is the standard rate, the full year cost of reducing the rate from 23% to 21% is estimated at €570m. I have no current plans to reduce VAT rates.
230. Deputy Martin Heydon asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding the taxation of Department of Social Protection pensions pre-2012 in view of the fact that certain taxpayers such as a person (details supplied) in County Kildare are now being assessed for 2010 and 2011; if there has been a change in the Revenue policy in relation to the collection of backdated tax on these pensions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6947/13]
View answerPensions payable by the Department of Social Protection (DSP) have always been taxable but the amount of tax payable, if any, depends on the circumstances of the individual concerned, usually whether they have other sources of income. As I have previously informed the House, I have been advised by the Revenue Commissioners that following receipt of data from the DSP in late 2011 containing details of DSP pension payments, it emerged that some pensioners with significant other income had not previously declared their DSP pension for tax purposes. Revenue’s approach was, firstly, to ensure that the record was correct for 2012 and thereafter to examine in detail the largest cases where there was a mismatch between their records and the DSP record, beginning with cases where annual non-DSP income exceeded €50,000. The information obtained from the initial examination would inform Revenue on how they would proceed with other higher risk cases. This follow-up project has been ongoing and Revenue is now corresponding with taxpayers who did not declare their DSP pension where they have annual non-DSP income of between €30,000 and €40,000.
This correspondence, which gives the taxpayers in question an opportunity to engage with Revenue, and, for example, to claim any unclaimed tax reliefs such as medical expenses etc., is in keeping with Revenue’s normal practice.
231. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the limits the National Assets Management Agency sets on debtors living costs that is rent, by month and by year. [7042/13]
View answer232. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance if the National Assets Management Agency allows debtors to remain members of exclusive clubs. [7043/13]
View answer233. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance his views on whether it is appropriate that debtors in the National Assets Management Agency retain membership of exclusive private clubs, can take expensive holidays such as ski trips and continue to drive around in top of the range cars. [7044/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 231 to 233, inclusive, together.
NAMA advises that its role as a secured lender does not extend to determining or restricting the clubs or associations to which individuals debtors may belong. Nor is NAMA in a position to dictate a debtor’s choice of holiday location.
NAMA seeks to ensure that income generated by assets securing NAMA loans is applied towards repaying a debtor’s indebtedness to NAMA. In certain circumstances, debtors are allowed to retain a portion of asset income in lieu of overheads which include staff costs. NAMA also seeks to obtain charges over a debtor’s unencumbered assets and to realise such assets so as to further reduce indebtedness.
Clearly, however, NAMA has no control over the application of income generated by assets securing loans which have been advanced to debtors by other financial institutions.
The Deputy will be aware that where the evidence available to NAMA is that a debtor has failed, as part of a sworn statement of affairs, to disclose all his assets, he will be faced with very serious consequences. NAMA has made it clear that it will not work with debtors who fail to co-operate fully and openly with it. NAMA will also pursue through the courts debtors who fail to co-operate with it in terms of agreeing to the reversal of asset transfers or to the granting of legal charges over unencumbered assets.
234. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the investigations, if any, that have taken place by the Financial Regulator into the activities of private financial management and investment companies who may have falsely advertised the size of the portfolios or engaged in other fraudulent activity over the course of the last ten years. [7045/13]
View answerThe Minister for Finance has no role in the management of the financial regulatory functions of the Central Bank. However, I have been informed by the Central Bank that, due to the confidentiality requirements set out in Section 33AK of the Central Bank Act 1942, it cannot comment on any investigation that may have taken place into the activities of regulated firms.
235. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the exposure, if any, estimated to arise for the State from the case being taken by Enid Investment Corporation against Irish Bank Resolution Corporation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7109/13]
View answerAs the Deputy will be aware, on 5 February 2013 the Oireachtas passed legislation (Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Act 2013), appointing joint Special Liquidators to IBRC with immediate effect to wind up its business and operations. At this early stage of the special liquidation Special Liquidators are engaged in intensive processes which involves inter alia, asserting control over the businesses, processes, systems and personnel of IBRC. It is important that focus is placed on assessing, reorganising and restructuring the day–to-day activities of the Bank to meet the primary objective of ensuring the purpose of the special liquidation is achieved, as this is key to ensuring that value is extracted from the liquidation.
As such the Bank is not in a position to provide the information requested by the Deputy.
I thank the Deputy for his understanding in what is a crucial phase in the liquidation.
236. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide details of the current investigation being undertaken by the Central Bank of Ireland into possible mis-selling of payment protection insurance policies by financial institutions; if he will state if there is any estimate of the amount of compensation required for customers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7117/13]
View answerI have been advised by the Central Bank that the investigations into the incorrect selling of payment protection insurance to consumers are still on-going. The Central Bank has requested several firms to conduct comprehensive reviews of their payment protection insurance sales – this investigation to be overseen by a third party. The listed firms have commenced their reviews of payment protection insurance sales since July 2007. The Central Bank has extended its investigations to examine sales by other banks and credit institutions. Arising from the reviews each firm must determine what action is required, including contacting consumers and making refunds, where necessary. I have been further advised by the Central Bank that it is closely monitoring the progress of these reviews. The Central Bank has indicated to me that, at this stage, it is not possible, to estimate the time frame for completion of the reviews, how many consumers are likely to be affected or the total amount of re-imbursements.
The Central Bank is updating consumers on the progress of the on-going investigations.
237. Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan asked the Minister for Finance the amount that Anglo Irish Bank-IBRC spent in legal fees in relation to Quinn companies and the Quinn family, both in this jurisdiction and in all others; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7123/13]
View answerAs the Deputy will be aware, on 5 February 2013 the Oireachtas passed legislation (Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Act 2013), appointing joint Special Liquidators to IBRC with immediate effect to wind up its business and operations. At this early stage of the special liquidation Special Liquidators are engaged in intensive processes which involve inter alia, asserting control over the businesses, processes, systems and personnel of IBRC. It is important that focus is placed on assessing, reorganising and restructuring the day–to-day activities of the Bank to meet the primary objective of ensuring the purpose of the special liquidation is achieved, as this is key to ensuring that value is extracted from the liquidation.
As such the Bank is not in a position to provide the information requested by the Deputy.
I thank the Deputy for his understanding in what is a crucial phase in the liquidation.
238. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 248 of 5 February 2013, if he will confirm that he has provided a complete response; his views on the Abadi litigation with Allied Irish Bank; in view of the fact that he is a 15% shareholder in bank of Ireland, and formerly the shareholder of nearly 50%, if he will provide a list of the legal actions initiated by the holders of subordinated or senior bonds in the covered banks; the date the action was initiated; the identity of the applicant or applicants; and the identity of the respondent and the jurisdiction in which the action has been initiated. [7153/13]
View answerThe response to Parliamentary Question No. 248 of 5 February 2013 sets out the information received from each of the covered institutions in relation to the question posed. There were, also, two additional cases initiated against the Minister for Finance by holders of subordinated debt which were inadvertently omitted from that answer. Details of these cases are set out in tabular form below. The Minister for Finance made a statement in relation to the court action initiated against the Minister for Finance, Ireland and the Attorney General by Abadi and others on 3 June 2011. A copy of the statement is attached to this response. AIB was not a defendant to Abadi’s claim although it was a notice party to a claim made in the same proceedings by another bondholder for a limited purpose. Any confusion caused by the response to Parliamentary Question No.248 is regretted.
Cases
|
Proceedings |
Date Commenced |
Plaintiffs/Applicants |
Defendant/ Respondent |
Jurisdiction |
Case Withdrawn/ Struck Out |
|
Abadi & Co. Securities Limited v. The Minister for Finance, Ireland and The Attorney General The High Court 2011/114 MCA and The High Court 2011/4118P |
April 2011 |
Abadi & Co. Securities Limited |
The Minister for Finance, Ireland and The Attorney General |
Ireland |
3 June 2011 |
|
Aurelius Capital Master Limited, ACP Master Limited, Aurelius Convergence Master Limited v. The Minister for Finance – Notice Party AIB The High Court 2011/114 MCA |
April 2011 |
Aurelius Capital Master Limited, ACP Master Limited, Aurelius Convergence Master Limited |
The Minister for Finance AIB was a Notice Party, not a Defendant |
Ireland |
1 July 2011 |
The covered institutions have supplied the following information in response to your questions.
PTSB:
PTSB have informed me that no legal actions have been initiated by the holders of subordinated or senior bonds in respect of PTSB.
AIB:
AIB has informed me that one claim has been initiated by a New York based entity. It commenced litigation in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against AIB arising out of the Liability Management Exercise in May 2011.
The claim was dismissed by the New York courts in August 2012 on the grounds that New York was not the appropriate jurisdiction in which to bring proceedings. All relevant disclosures in respect of this case are publicly available through New York District Court website www.nysd.uscourts.gov.
BOI:
BOI have informed me that in its published financial reports, shareholder circulars and prospectuses, which are all available on the Bank of Ireland website, Bank of Ireland provides appropriate disclosures concerning material litigation related issues.
IBRC:
IBRC have informed me of the following cases and details:
|
Proceedings |
Date Commenced |
Plaintiff/ Applicants |
Defendant/ Respondent |
Jurisdiction |
|
Assenagon Asset Management v IBRC 2012/2264; HC11C01320 |
15 April 2011 |
Assenagon asset Management SA |
IBRC |
England & Wales |
|
Enid Investment Corporation v IBRC 2012/2989; HC12B03156 |
3 Aug 2011 |
Enid Investment Corporation |
IBRC |
England & Wales |
|
Fir Tree Capital Opportunity Master Fund LP and Fir Tree Value Master Fund LP v Anglo Irish Bank Corporation Limited (formerly Anglo Irish Bank Corporation Plc) Civil Action No.11/CV/0955 |
9 March 2011 |
Fir Tree Capital Opportunity Master Fund LP and Fir Tree Value Master Fund LP |
IBRC |
United States District Court – Southern District of New York United States Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit. |
239. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the cost to the State annually of continuing to pay interest on the subordinated Anglo bonds held by Fir Tree Capital. [7154/13]
View answerAs the Deputy will be aware, on 5 February 2013 the Oireachtas passed legislation (Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Act 2013), appointing joint Special Liquidators to IBRC with immediate effect to wind up its business and operations. At this early stage of the special liquidation Special Liquidators are engaged in intensive processes which involve inter alia, asserting control over the businesses, processes, systems and personnel of IBRC. It is important that focus is placed on assessing, reorganising and restructuring the day–to-day activities of the Bank to meet the primary objective of ensuring the purpose of the special liquidation is achieved, as this is key to ensuring that value is extracted from the liquidation.
As such the Bank is not in a position to provide the information requested by the Deputy.
I thank the Deputy for his understanding in what is a crucial phase in the liquidation.
240. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Finance his views on a report carried out by the ESRI for the Interdepartmental Expert Group on Property Tax dated April 2012, in particular in relation to the section dealing with waivers (details supplied); if he will consider the introduction of different categories of waivers for people on lower incomes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7155/13]
View answerThe ESRI report mentioned by the Deputy was commissioned by the Interdepartmental Expert Group on Property Tax (the “Thornhill Group”) and was charged with analysing a residential property tax which would yield specified annual revenue yields. The report notes that increasing the income thresholds will have an impact on the rate of property tax that will be applied. As the income threshold increases the rate will also be required to increase to achieve the same revenue yields.
The Thornhill Group, in its approach to exemptions, considered that the local property tax should be centred on the principles of equity, transparency and simplicity. In terms of these principles, it was also considered that a universal liability should apply to all owners of residential property with a limited number of exemptions. The Group considered that waivers were an inefficient and costly method of targeting reliefs, whereas voluntary deferrals can be used to address cases where there is an inability to pay.
The Government agreed with the Thornhill Group’s recommendations that exemptions should be limited and voluntary deferrals were more appropriate for addressing issues of inability to pay. Part 12 of the Finance (Local Property Tax) Act 2012 sets out provisions for deferral of the local property tax charge. The deferral of the charge is granted under specific conditions. Where the residential property is the sole or main residence of a liable person and her, his or their estimated gross income from all sources does not exceed €15,000 for a single person or €25,000 for a couple during the year covered by the return, she/he/they will be eligible to apply for full deferral of the LPT charge.
In addition, for income stressed owner-occupiers who have an outstanding mortgage, an adjusted gross income limit will apply. In these cases, the income thresholds of €15,000 or €25,000 may be increased by 80% of the annual mortgage interest payments. This type of deferral is available until the end of 2017.
Moreover, owner-occupiers may be eligible to apply for partial deferral where the gross income from all sources is less than €25,000 in the case of a single person and €35,000 in the case of a couple. For income stressed owner-occupiers who have an outstanding mortgage, these thresholds may also be increased by 80% of the annual mortgage interest payments. In these cases the owner-occupier will qualify for deferrals of 50% of the LPT liability and the balance of 50% of the tax must be paid.
In recommending the income thresholds the Thornhill Group had regard to the analysis from the ESRI report. An income level of €25,000 for joint and co-owners/spouses/civil partners/cohabitees was recommended in order to enable most households in the lowest 40% of income levels to have the option of deferral. This is considered appropriate, having regard to the findings in the ESRI study regarding potential impacts on households and having regard to the need for balance and equity in terms of the burden thereby imposed on those with higher (but still average or below average) incomes.
The income level of €15,000 for a single person is derived by applying an “equivalence” scale used by the ESRI. That scale is broadly reflected in social welfare payment rates i.e. for any given payment type, such as Jobseeker’s Allowance or State Pension, the payment rate for a couple is broadly 166% that of a single person and is widely accepted internationally.
The Government accepted the income thresholds for a full deferral recommended by the Thornhill Group, and adapted the income thresholds for a partial deferral so that they are €10,000 rather than €5,000 above the thresholds for a full deferral.
I do not plan to introduce different categories of waivers for people on lower incomes.
241. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the legal costs incurred by the National Asset Management Agency in its case in the High Court and Supreme Court in 2010 and 2011 against a person (details supplied) and which concluded at the Supreme Court in April 2011. [7203/13]
View answerThe case referred to was taken by the person against NAMA, Ireland and the Attorney General. I am advised by NAMA that, as costs in this case have not been agreed or taxed at this point, the information sought by the Deputy is not currently available.
242. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the person or persons responsible for ongoing negotiations with the troika, particularly the European Central Bank in respect of the future of the promissory notes. [7204/13]
View answerAs the Deputy is aware, this Government reached a conclusion to its discussions with the European Central Bank last week that delivered on our commitment to put in place a fairer and more sustainable arrangement on the IBRC Promissory Notes. Last week also saw the remnants of Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide removed from the financial and political landscape. Officials within my department, the NTMA and the Central Bank of Ireland have been involved in these negotiations on Ireland’s behalf. The Deputy will appreciate that it is not appropriate to disclose individual details of those involved in this work. I wish to reiterate what was said by An Taoiseach by thanking all the officials for bringing these discussions to a successful conclusion.
243. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance if he will confirm the estimate of payments to the Insurance Compensation Fund in 2013; and if he will provide the total amount due from the ICF to the State at the end of January 2013. [7209/13]
View answerThe Insurance Compensation Fund (ICF) operates under the Insurance Act 1964. Its purpose is to protect policy holders in the event of their insurer becoming insolvent. It is an industry financed fund. However because the scheme is not pre-funded, the Act provides for the Exchequer to advance monies on the recommendation of the Central Bank in circumstances where insufficient funds have been generated by an industry levy to cover a large demand. Under the Insurance Act 1964 the responsibility for deciding whether the ICF has sufficient funds available to it to at any particular time is a matter for the Central Bank. Where in the Bank’s opinion the state of the Fund is such that financial support should be provided for it, it determines an appropriate contribution to be paid to it by each insurer calculated as a percentage, not exceeding 2% of the aggregate of the gross premiums paid to that insurer in respect of policies issued in respect of risks in the State. On the basis of its assessment of the Fund the Central Bank concluded that a levy should be applied to industry with effect from 1 January 2012 under section 6 of the Insurance Act 1964.
I estimate that in the region of €337m will be paid into the ICF in 2013 made up of a total advance of €272m from the Exchequer plus €65m from the ICF levy.
At the end of December 2012 the total amount due from the ICF to the State was €762m. There was an additional advance in January 2013 of €154m which brings the total amount outstanding at the end of January 2013 to €916m. This information is set out in the table below.
It should be noted that I would expect the ICF to be in a position to start repaying the State from about 2015. Based on information currently available it is estimated that it will take in the region of 12 to 15 years from the commencement of repayment for the Exchequer to recover its advances in full.
Finally, you should be aware that the interest rate that applies to the advances is 250bp over the 6 month Euribor rate.
|
Year |
Advance |
Interest due* |
|
2011 |
€280m |
€1.84m |
|
2012 |
€455m |
€25.20m |
|
2013 to date |
€154m |
- |
|
Total Amount due at the End of January 2013 |
€916.04m |
- |
* There will be interest due on the amount outstanding at the end of 2013.
244. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Finance if a person (details supplied) in County Longford, will be liable for property tax in July on a house which is new, unoccupied and for sale for the last four years and still has some work outstanding on it and which by July will form part of a discretionary trust for his son and daughter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7230/13]
View answerI am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that it would not be appropriate to give a definitive reply based on the information supplied by the Deputy. The following may be helpful by way of general information. A liability for LPT will arise where a person owns a residential property which is in use or is suitable for use as a dwelling on the liability date, which will be 1 May 2013 for the year 2013. Properties held in discretionary trusts are not exempt from the LPT per se, and in such cases the trustees are liable to pay the tax. However, the following exemptions from Local Property Tax (LPT) apply, whether the properties are held in a discretionary trust or otherwise: Residential properties constructed by a builder or developer that remain unsold and have not been used as dwellings previously, New and previously unused properties that are purchased from a builder or developer between 1 January 2013 and 31 October 2016, Properties purchased by first time buyers between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2013, once they are occupied by them as their sole or main residence, Properties in unfinished housing estates (commonly called “ghost estates”) specified by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government.
The Local Property Tax is a self-assessed tax and I am advised that if a property is not in use or is not suitable for use as a dwelling, the liable person is obliged to notify the Revenue Commissioners as soon as possible after they receive their LPT return, outlining why they consider a charge to LPT does not arise on the property and including relevant supporting documentation.
245. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Finance the cost to the Exchequer of allowing tax relief at the marginal rate in respect of income protection policies. [7354/13]
View answerSection 471 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides relief in respect of premiums paid to a bona fide permanent health benefit scheme. The relief is confined to an amount not exceeding 10 per cent of the individual’s total income for any tax year. Where the premium is paid by an individual’s employer and is taxed on the individual as a perquisite, the premium is treated as having been paid by the employee and qualifies for relief. The relief is given as a deduction from total income. Tax relief is, therefore, effectively allowed at the taxpayer’s marginal tax rate. While part of the cost of contributions to permanent health benefit schemes is not identifiable as a result of a move to a “net pay” basis of contributions by PAYE taxpayers from 6 April 2001, I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that the identifiable cost to the Exchequer for the income tax year 2010, the most recent year for which the necessary detailed historical information is available, is estimated at €3.9 million.
246. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Finance if he will detail all tax reliefs currently available to taxpayers at their marginal rate of tax. [7355/13]
View answerThe tax reliefs set out below are available for relief against calculated taxable income at the taxpayer's marginal rate. The Deputy should note that there are certain other exemptions, such as the artist's exemption, which provide that the relevant income does not come into charge at all. The Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides that the following may give rise to relief at the taxpayer’s marginal rate:
- Expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred in the performance of the duties of an office or employment – claims made under section 114;
- Interest relief in respect of loans taken prior to 7 December 2010 to purchase an interest in a company – claims made under section 248;
- Rented residential relief – also known as ‘section 23 type relief’ – eligible expenditure is treated as a deduction in computing rental profits – section 372AP;
- Losses incurred in a trade or profession (Case I and II) and losses in property letting (Case V) – claims made under sections 381 to 390 inclusive;
- Allowance for an employed person taking care of an incapacitated individual – claim made under section 467;
- Health expenses in respect of expenditure incurred in respect of nursing home expenses (all other expenses are allowed at the standard rate) – claim made under section 469;
- Permanent Health Benefit premiums paid in respect of an approved policy – relief granted under section 471;
- Revenue job assist for long-term unemployed taking up employment – relief allowed under section 472A;
- Seafarer’s allowance – allowance granted under section 472B;
- Relief for investment in films – relief allowed under section 481;
- Relief for expenditure on significant buildings and gardens – deduction allowed under section 482;
- Relief for certain gifts made to the Minister for Finance – relief allowed under section 483;
- Carry forward of excess reliefs of high earners – relief carried forward under section 485F;
- Relief for lessors of certain farmland – entitlement to deduction under section 664;
- Carbon tax on farm diesel – additional deduction for increase in rate of carbon tax on farm diesel from 1 May 2012 – section 664A;
- Stock relief for farmers – at rates ranging from 25% to 100% of the increase in stock value in an accounting period – sections 666, 667B and 667C – (subject to EU approval/ Ministerial Commencement Orders);
- Deeds of covenant in favour of permanently incapacitated individuals – relief allowed under section 792;
- Foreign Earnings Deduction (FED) for income earned in certain foreign states (Brazil, Russia, India, China or South Africa) – deduction allowed under section 823A;
- Relief allowed under the Special Assignment Relief Program (SARP) – relief allowed under section 825B;
- Donations to certain sports bodies by self assessed taxpayers – relief allowed under section 847A
- Donations to charities and other approved bodies by self assessed taxpayers– relief allowed under section 848A and Schedule 26A (it is proposed in the forthcoming Finance Bill to remove this deduction and to give relief to charities directly in respect of donations made after 1 January 2013);
- Relief for maintenance in case of separated spouses, or civil partners living apart – relief allowed under either section 1025 or section 1031J;
- Capital allowances in relation to industrial buildings and plant and machinery are available as deductions in taxing trading income and rental income.
- Relief for Investment in Corporate Trades, Employment and Investment Incentive Schemes, and Seed Capital Schemes – relief granted under Part 16; and
- Relief for contributions to retirement benefits schemes and personal pensions (subject to certain maxima) – granted under Part 30.
It should be noted that some of these reliefs are subject to restrictions. For example, Case V losses can only be set against Case V profits. Moreover, it should be noted that virtually all incentive reliefs are subject to the high earners’ restriction provided for in section 485C. The aim of this relief is to ensure that high earners who are subject to the restriction in full can only use so much of these reliefs in any one year as will leave them with an effective tax rate of 30%. Any relief not used in a year can be carried forward to future years.
Relief in respect of any claim by a taxpayer, where relief may be allowed at the marginal rate, is only allowed at that marginal rate where the taxpayer is otherwise paying tax at that rate.
247. Deputy Jim Daly asked the Minister for Finance the cost incurred by his Department for assessing means of individual citizens for any reason on an annual basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7388/13]
View answerMy Department only deals with legislative, policy and budgetary matters for citizens in general. We have no role in assessing the means of actual individual citizens. From time to time my Department carries out theoretical exercises on the effect of proposed tax changes on theoretical individuals in certain income groups, however this does not entail an assessment of individual means.
248. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Education and Skills the position regarding an application for the school transport scheme in respect of persons and a school (details supplied) in County Cork. [7048/13]
View answerUnder the terms of my Department's School Transport Scheme for Children with Special Educational Needs, children are eligible for transport where they: have special educational needs arising from a diagnosed disability in accordance with the designation of high and low incidence disability set out in Department of Education and Skill's (DES) Circular 02/05 and are attending the nearest recognised: mainstream school, special class/special school or a unit, that is or can be resourced, to meet their special educational needs.
Eligibility is determined following consultation with the National Council for Special Education (NCSE) through its network of Special Education Needs Organisers (SENOs). The NCSE has responsibility, through its network of SENO's, for the establishment of special education facilities and for allocating resource teachers and special needs assistants to schools to support children with special educational needs.
The pupils referred to are not eligible for school transport as they are not attending their nearest recognised school that is or can be resourced to meet their special educational needs.
249. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Education and Skills the number of contracted training companies employed by FÁS that have payments due to them for courses delivered now being withheld or retained by FÁS; if the amount of money involved in each case will be listed with an indication as to how long the amount is being withheld; if he will state the way these amounts are accounted for in the annual returns of FÁS; if the State's prompt payment policy is being breached; if legal fees have been incurred relative to this issue; if there is a special unit appointed to resolve the issues with the companies involved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7246/13]
View answerOutside of normal processing of retention claims, currently there are no payments outstanding to contractors. At the end of January 2013, there are 101 Contracted Training Companies that have amounts retained by FÁS in accordance with contractual obligations in relation to 2011, 2012 and 2013. The value of such retentions is €3.120m. This amount is accrued in the books of FÁS in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, i.e. prudence concept even though no liability arises until all contractual commitments are met.
There is no breach of prompt payment legislation in relation to such retentions as contractors must complete certain contractual commitments before such amounts become payable and are then authorised for release. There are High Court proceedings currently being taken against FÁS by a contracted trainer in respect of course retention fees allegedly owed. In light of this, it would not be appropriate for me to say anything further on this matter.
There is no special unit in FÁS responsible for resolving issues in relation to retentions. The management of retention release is a normal part of the contract process and is dealt with on a contract by contract basis by the FÁS Training Centre that issued the contract. There is a unit in FÁS that is responsible for Contracted Training policy and this unit may assist in the resolution of issues that Contractors may have subject to contractual commitments and legal advice if necessary.
