Skip to main content
Normal View

Tax Compliance

Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 14 February 2013

Thursday, 14 February 2013

Questions (148)

Róisín Shortall

Question:

148. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Finance the number of reviews of taxpayers that have been undertaken by the Revenue Commissioners in each of the years since the self-assessment system was adopted; the number of these where a discrepancy was identified; the amount recovered from such cases; if he will outline the way the Revenue Commissioners are minimising the risk of fraud and error arising from the self-assessment method; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7979/13]

View answer

Written answers

I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that all developed countries operate some form of self-assessment system for their business taxpayers. The Irish self-assessment system ensures that there are tight controls in place for tax return filing rates which are borne out by the timely filing rates of 98% for large cases, 95% for medium cases and 80% for all other cases, across all taxes. This strategy is supported by a comprehensive compliance programme of audits, risk management interventions, special investigations and prosecutions. I am further advised that, as Self-Assessment for income tax was introduced in 1988 and for corporation tax in 1989 and as the data is not maintained in a suitable format, it is not possible to provide all the details sought by the Deputy without an extensive examination of Revenue records. However, they have supplied me with the Tables below, which give comprehensive data for seven years from 2006 to 2012. The various interventions shown are not confined to direct taxes, and would include VAT, Excise etc. where relevant.

Type of Intervention

Numbers Completed and  Yield

Numbers Completed

and Yield

Numbers Completed and Yield

-

(€m)

(€m)

(€m)

-

2008

2007

2006

Comprehensive (All taxhead)

3,904 (262)

3,875 (344.5)

4,127 (436.2)

Single Tax/Duty Audits

6,082 (184)

6,603 (151.6)

 6,305 (133.5)

Multi Tax/ Duty Audits

2,065 (65)

2,206 (71.2)

1,757 (56.2)

Single Issue/Transaction Audits

1,363 (59)

1,624 (120.3)

1,437 (23.8)

Total Audits

13,414 (570)

14,308 (687.6)

13,626 (649.7)

Assurance Checks

345,452 (63)

237,626 (46.2)

176,064  (42.1)

Total Interventions

358,866 (633)

251,934 (733.8)

189,690  (691.8)

Type of Intervention

Completed 2011

Yield

Completed 2010

Yield

Completed 2009

Yield

-

-

€m

-

€m

-

€m

Comprehensive (All taxheads)

4,717

183.6

4,209

197.1

4,353

279

Multi Tax/Duty Audits

1,236

61.6

1,374

53.6

1,735

63

Single Tax/Duty Audits

3,345

126.9

3,841

111.6

5,053

163

Single Issue/Transaction Audits

1,768

68.4

1,584

72.4

1,278

97

Total Audit Interventions

11,066

440.5

11,088

434.7

12,419

602

Assurance Checks

546,502

81.3

454,796

58.0

361,480

66

Total Interventions (Audit & Assurance)

557,568

521.8

465,804

492.7

373,899

668

2012

Audit Interventions

Completed 2012

Yield 2012

-

-

€m

Comprehensive (All taxheads)

4,687

181.8

Multi Tax/Duty Audits

   985

 34.7

Single Tax/Duty Audits

2,624

 99.7

Single Issue/Transaction Audits

   769

 42.9

PAYE Compliance Interventions

29,881

 23.2

Risk Management Interventions

125,073

 87.7

Assurance Checks

373,803

 22.4

Total Compliance Interventions (Audit, Risk & Assurance)

537,822

492.4

The Commissioners also advise that these figures, year-on-year, are not directly comparable due to a re-labelling of compliance interventions and the continuing evolution of their compliance programmes to reflect changes in the economy and the efficient use of resources. Not all Revenue interventions take the form of formal audits or investigations and in accordance with their risk-based approach cases are selected for intervention based on the presence of various risk indicators. Each Revenue intervention is intended to be in the form which is most efficient in terms of time and resources, and which imposes the least cost on the taxpayer, whilst addressing the perceived risk and consequently Revenue carry out Risk Management Interventions, which take the form of Aspect Queries and Profile Interviews.

Revenue's objective in case working is to ensure that each case (taxpayer or business) is fully compliant with their legal obligations in relation to the keeping of proper books and records, the timely and accurate submission of required declarations and the prompt payment of tax and duty liabilities. This approach ensures that, as far as possible, the self-assessment system operates effectively and minimises instances of fraud or mistake.

The selection of cases in which to intervene is a critical step in Revenue’s compliance programme and case selection derives from a variety of sources. In addition to specific projects like the shadow economy project, Revenue also uses extensive third party data, good citizen’s reports and other intelligence to drive its compliance interventions. In the past two years, Revenue has also been using advanced analytics to help it identify indicators of fraud or error from taxpayer’s filings and they are regarded as a leading tax administration in the deployment of these technologies.

I am also informed that a major focus of Revenue’s activities in relation to self-assessed cash businesses is to tackle shadow economy activities including the suppression of sales, wages and income by registered businesses and fraudulent repayment claims. It is a multi-faceted issue that requires a co-ordinated and varied response.

Revenue tackles the problem of the shadow economy through its range of compliance and audit interventions including through targeted special projects. Case interventions are undertaken based on Revenue’s assessment of compliance risks, the level of those risks and other relevant information available. Revenue is using a wide range of methodologies to identify those operating in the shadow economy and is deploying the full range of compliance interventions.

The Deputy will be aware of the continuing strengthening of legislation to provide for a robust framework within which the Revenue Commissioners may tackle tax evasion, including recent provisions relating to the making of returns of transactions by merchant acquirers, and other payment settlement organisations, to the Revenue Commissioners and Regulations, introduced in 2011, requiring Government Departments and State Bodies to supply details to the Revenue Commissioners of payments made.

Revenue investigations have also detected the use of computer programmes or electronic devices to alter or conceal sales records. To counteract these risks, legislation was also enacted in 2011 providing penalties for the possession, use or supply of automated sales suppression devices known as "zappers" for the purpose of evading tax.

I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that the results from all the various projects undertaken by Revenue are reflected in the general audit and compliance results from audits, assurance checks, and other risk management intervention which are published in Revenue’s Annual Report. The high level of success in securing settlements is a reflection of the targeted approach used by Revenue which is to focus its compliance resources on the areas of greatest risk. An associated strategy is to minimise the number of contacts with compliant taxpayers.

I am confident that the Revenue Commissioners have a very clear focus to target and confront those who do not comply, as set out in their Statement of Strategy for 2011 to 2013.

Top
Share