Written Answers Nos. 161-178
161. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the fact that a number of Permanent TSB customers who topped up their mortgages with Permanent TSB were issued second home and life insurance policies; his views on whether PTSB has a duty of care to check all remortgaged policies on its books to verify and pay back moneys paid into these policies; and his views on this practice of issuing second policies. [6609/14]
View answerI am informed by Permanent TSB that it is normal lending practice to ensure that a customer has in place sufficient life assurance to cover the value of their mortgage (which with limited exceptions is otherwise a legal requirement under the Consumer Credit Act), together with home insurance to cover the replacement value of a house on which the mortgage is charged. When a customer increases their borrowings through a re-mortgage, and the new borrowings exceed the cover provided by the existing life policy, then it may be necessary to increase the level of life cover to match the new amount borrowed. In some circumstances, additional buildings or contents cover may also be required if the purpose of the re-mortgage was for home extension or where the existing home insurance policy was found not to provide adequate cover on the existing property. At no time did Permanent TSB have a policy of knowingly issuing surplus home or life policies to customers where adequate cover on the mortgage was known to be in place.
I am informed by Permanent TSB that the customer to whom the Deputy refers took out a Home Insurance policy from a TSB Branch in 2001. Five years later, in 2006, the customer acquired a second Home Insurance policy while re-mortgaging in a different branch. It was not a condition of the re-mortgage nor was there any requirement to retain the 2001 policy. However it would appear that this policy was not cancelled by the customer.
Permanent TSB has informed me that when it was made aware by the customer that two policies were in place a full refund was issued by the insurance company for the overlapping period and the policies cancelled at the customer's request. I have also been advised by Permanent TSB that this type of substantiated complaint is very rare and that the Bank firmly believes there are no wider issues that would be uncovered from a review of its loan book.
Finally, the Bank also has processes in place to ensure that customer complaints of this type are dealt with thoroughly and in a timely manner. If dissatisfied with the Bank's response customers also have the right to refer their complaint to the Financial Services Ombudsman for adjudication.
162. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding VAT in respect of dog grooming (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6610/14]
View answerThe supply of dog grooming services is liable to VAT at the standard rate, currently 23 per cent. Paragraph 21(3) of Schedule 3 to the Value-Added Tax Consolidated Act 2010 provides that the supply of services by a veterinary surgeon in the course of their profession is liable at the reduced rate of VAT, currently 13.5%. Where a veterinary surgeon carries out a dog grooming service as part of a veterinary procedure, such as treating an illness or disease, the dog grooming is considered part of the veterinary procedure and the entire procedure is liable to VAT at the reduced rate. However, where a veterinary surgeon provides a dog grooming services as a supply that is distinct from a veterinary procedure the service is liable to VAT at the 23% rate.
The VAT rating of goods and services is subject to the requirements of EU VAT law with which Irish VAT law must comply. While the EU VAT Directive provides for the possibility of applying a reduced of VAT to the supply of certain goods and services, the supply of dog grooming services is not one that could have a reduced rate applied to it.
163. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if EBS customers will be eligible for participation in the scheme announced by AIB which includes an element of debt write-off for mortgage customers eligible for a new split mortgage; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6612/14]
View answer164. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if AIB customers who are currently subject to an existing split mortgage will be eligible for the recently announced initiative which includes an element of debt write-off for customers who adhere to a split mortgage arrangement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6613/14]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 163 and 164 together.
I have been informed by AIB that the new split mortgage product will be available to AIB and EBS customers on a case by case basis subject to a full assessment of their financial position. AIB have also informed me that the new split mortgage product will be available to customers who have taken up their existing split mortgage and continue to meet the eligibility criteria.
165. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Finance the total amount of money spent by the State Claims Agency on legal fees in 2012 and in 2013; if he will provide, in tabular form, the firms paid in each year; the amount paid to each firm; the average settlement period for claims concluded in 2012 and in 2013; his views on the average length of time to settle a case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6631/14]
View answerThe information requested by the Deputy is set out under the following subheadings.
1. Total amount of money spent by the State Claims Agency on legal fees in 2012 and in 2013
|
- |
2012 (€m) |
2013 (€m) |
|
Legal Cost Transactions per year |
17,165,197 |
18,443,185 |
|
Total Defence Legal Costs |
21,931,385 |
24,314,355 |
|
Total Claimant Legal Costs |
39,096,582 |
42,757,540 |
Defence costs are fees paid by the SCA to solicitors engaged to act in the defence of claims managed by the SCA. Claimants' legal costs may be paid as part of the settlement of a claim.
As the SCA has delegated certain personal injury related and third party property claims management functions, it is mandated to ensure that the liability of the State in relation to such claims, and the expenses of the Agency in relation to such management, is contained at the lowest achievable level. In conjunction with the delegated State Authorities, the SCA has a strong track record in reducing the cost of managing claims under its remit.
The following are some of the more notable methods used to manage and reduce such costs:
I. Solicitors' Fees
In 2010/2011 the SCA invited tenders in respect of the provision of legal services by solicitors' firms in connection with its personal injury (non-clinical), third-party property damage and clinical claims portfolios. Following the tender, the SCA reduced the level of fees paid to its retained solicitors firms by approximately 25 per cent. In addition the SCA imposed caps on the levels of the fees paid to its panel solicitors in respect of catastrophic injury.
II. Barristers' Fees
In 2012, the SCA announced a new procurement structure requiring barristers to engage in a competitive tendering process under which their fees were capped at up to 25 per cent below pre-procurement levels. This was the first time a State agency had procured barristers services for personal injury litigation in this way. Under the new procurement process, barristers were required to set out their fees - subject to the respective caps specified by the SCA - for a wide range of legal services in respect of personal injury actions in the District, Circuit and High Courts. The new procurement structure also provided for a panel of barristers, to provide services to the SCA, who had less than five years practice/experience, so they could gain relevant experience in the area of personal injury actions. This was an initiative by the SCA to encourage younger barristers and to create greater competition at the Irish Bar by increasing the pool of barristers available to it. The barristers procurement initiative attracted approximately 1,000 applications.
III. Optimal Claims Management and use of the SCA In-House Legal Team
The SCA claims management teams endeavour, wherever possible, and in the appropriate cases, to settle claims prior to the issue and service of legal proceedings, thus reducing the State's overall legal costs bill. In addition, a proportion of litigated claims are handled by the SCA's in-house legal team, thereby reducing the outsourcing costs in respect of legal services. In 2012 the in-house legal team was expanded and a separate, dedicated legal team was established to deal with clinical claims. When fully established it is estimated that an annual saving of approximately €4 million may be achieved.
IV. Claimant Legal Costs
The level of legal costs paid to plaintiffs' legal representatives is carefully reviewed and, wherever possible and by means of negotiations, the SCA seeks to achieve the maximum possible reduction in legal costs. If the SCA cannot successfully agree the level of legal costs to be paid to plaintiffs' legal representatives, the matter is determined by a Taxing Master.
V. Money Recoveries/Third-Party Contributions
The SCA vigorously pursues all available money recoveries in accordance with best claim practices and as permitted by law. One such example is the recovery of damages and costs by means of third party/ codefendant contributions. Whether by adjudication of the court or agreement with the third party/codefendant, a specified percentage contribution in relation to a particular claim may be paid by the third party/codefendant to the SCA. Additionally, in certain cases, an indemnity in full may be received from a third party/codefendant.
2. In tabular form, the firms paid in each year; the amount paid to each firm
Defence legal costs:
All legal services engaged by the SCA in the management of claims under its remit are drawn from its panels of barristers and solicitors. The SCA can provide a breakdown of fees paid to individual firms in 2012 and 2013. However the collation of this information will require 2 -3 weeks to compile and ensure accuracy and I will write to the deputy with this information when it becomes available.
Claimant legal costs:
A breakdown of claimants' legal costs, by individual firm, is much more time consuming due to the volume of firms. As stated previously, these firms are engaged by the claimant and not the SCA.
3. Average settlement period for claims concluded in 2012 and in 2013;
The average end-to-end lifetime of claim (time from date logged with SCA to date the claims management process is complete) is included in the table below.
|
Class |
Public Liability (PL) |
Employers Liability (EL) |
3rd Party Property Damage (PD) |
Clinical claims |
|
Average lifetime 2011 |
2.4 years |
4.1 years |
335 days |
2.9 years |
|
Average lifetime 2012 |
2.7 years |
3.7 years |
301 days |
3.7 years |
|
Average lifetime 2013 |
3 years |
3.7 years |
350 days |
4 years |
Please note the above table is completed by the SCA on an annual basis but does not include HSE ELPLPD as this portfolio was delegated in 2012 and as yet is immature. It shall be included in 2014 figures.
The claims management process is complete only when plaintiff's costs have been resolved either through agreement or by means of taxation. The resolution of costs can add a year or more to the average life time of a case.
166. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Finance the number of solicitors and barristers directly employed by the State Claims Agency; and his views on the legal staffing of the agency. [6632/14]
View answerThe State Claims Agency directly employs 20 solicitors and 2 barristers. 12 solicitors are employed as clinical claims managers, being specialists in the management clinical negligence claims, whilst 6 solicitors are employed as in-house litigation managers. One solicitor is also a legal costs accountant in the Agency's Legal Costs Unit. A barrister and a solicitor are employed as non-clinical negligence claims managers.
The Agency is adequately staffed to meet its claims and litigation management functions and it is also assisted in its litigation management by its external panels of solicitors, located countrywide. The Agency constantly keeps its legal staffing under review, having regard to the size and demands of its claims' portfolios.
168. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Finance the action a person (details supplied) in Dublin 13 can take regarding their savings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6666/14]
View answerThe Central Bank has informed me that Home Payments Limited was not authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland ('Central Bank'). At the time Home Payments Limited was in operation, there was no regime in place targeting specifically the authorisation and supervision of businesses labelled "bill payment", "debt management" or "debt advice".
Eamonn Richardson of KPMG and Eamonn Leahy of Leahy & Co were appointed by the High Court as joint liquidators to Home Payments Limited on 24th August 2011. The liquidators took control of the company to secure all assets, records and bank accounts and contacted customers regarding repayment of any funds owed to them by Home Payments Limited. Individuals who suffered losses through their dealings with Home Payments Limited should contact the liquidators for information on the repayment process.
I, as Minister for Finance have no statutory role in relation to the resolution of the liquidation of this company.
The Government is not in a position to compensate clients of this company for losses incurred due to the liquidation.
The Deputy may be aware that, since the liquidation of that company, a new regulatory regime for debt management firms has been put in place under Section 59 of the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013.
A debt management firm is defined as "a person who for remuneration provides debt management services to one or more consumers, other than an excepted person".
'Debt management services' are defined in the legislation as"(a) giving advice about the discharge of debts (in whole or in part), including advice about budgeting in connection with the discharge of debts,(b) negotiating with a person's creditors for the discharge of the person's debts (in whole or in part), or(c) any similar activity associated with the discharge of debts."
Where debt management firms propose to receive client funds and make payments on behalf of clients to their creditors they may require a payment institution authorisation under the European Communities (Payment Services) Regulations 2009 or a money transmission business authorisation under Part V of the Central Bank Act 1997 (as amended) depending on their business model. It is under these regimes that the appropriate protection for client funds is provided for.
169. Deputy John O'Mahony asked the Minister for Finance the steps being taken to address the laundering of fuel; the total capacity of laundering plants seized in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013; the potential loss to the Exchequer of same; the estimated total annual cost of fuel laundering to the economy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6723/14]
View answerI am sure the Deputy will appreciate that it is inherently difficult to estimate the extent of any illicit activity and its impact on the exchequer and the wider economy. The Revenue Commissioners advise me that while there is no reliable estimate of the scale of illegal activity in the fuel sector, they recognise that the laundering of markers from rebated fuels represents a significant threat to exchequer revenues. Revenue has made action against this illegal activity one of its priorities and is implementing a comprehensive strategy to tackle the problem through enhanced supply chain controls, the acquisition of a more effective fuel marker and continued robust enforcement action.
Revenue's strategy includes the following elements:
- The licensing regime for auto fuel traders was strengthened with effect from September 2011 to limit the ability of the fuel criminals to get laundered fuel onto the market;
- A new licensing regime was introduced for marked fuel traders in October 2012, which is designed to limit the ability of criminals to source marked fuel for laundering;
- New requirements in relation to fuel traders' records of stock movements and fuel deliveries were introduced to ensure data are available to assist in supply chain analysis;
- Following a significant investment in the required IT systems, new supply chain controls were introduced from January 2013.
These controls require all licensed fuel traders, whether dealing in road fuel or marked fuel, to make monthly electronic returns to Revenue of their fuel transactions. Revenue is using this data to identify suspicious or anomalous transactions and patterns of distribution that will support follow-up enforcement action where necessary; an intensified targeting, in co-operation with other law enforcement agencies on both sides of the border, of enforcement action against suspected fuel laundering operations; and Revenue and HM Revenue & Customs in the UK have been working together to identify a more effective marker for use in both jurisdictions and an announcement concerning a new marker is expected shortly. Revenue also works with fuel sector representative bodies, which have been very supportive of the range of measures introduced to combat fuel laundering, to improve the integrity of the distribution system and minimise the risk of fraud. In support of this, I introduced a provision in the Finance (No. 2) Act 2013 that will make a supplier who is reckless in supplying rebated fuel for a use connected with excise fraud liable for the duty at the standard rate of tax. This new provision will strengthen Revenue's hand in dealing with those traders supplying fuel recklessly to dubious customers.
Revenue has recently published guidelines for mineral oil traders which will assist them in identifying and avoiding such transactions. Revenue chairs the Hidden Economy Monitoring Group and has established regional sub-groups to facilitate traders reporting suspicious matters through their representative associations on a confidential basis. This information can assist Revenue in closing down the illicit trade by identifying traders supplying fuel to launderers and by identifying outlets that are selling laundered diesel. Revenue's enforcement strategy in the fuel sector has already yielded significant results. In the period from mid-2011 to end 2013, 119 filling stations were closed for breaches of licensing conditions. Since the beginning of 2011, over 2.7 million litres of fuel have been seized and 29 oil laundries detected and closed down, including 9 oil laundries in 2013.
170. Deputy Simon Harris asked the Minister for Finance the reason pension retirement bonds are not allowed by the Revenue Commissioners to qualify for the approved retirement fund; if such bonds resulted from a pension scheme which did not allow the approved retirement fund option; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6728/14]
View answerBy way of background, Approved Retirement Funds (ARFs) were introduced by Finance Act 1999 to provide control, flexibility and choice to holders of personal pensions and to proprietary director members of occupational pension schemes in relation to the drawing down of benefits from their pension plans. Prior to that Act, any person taking a pension from a Defined Contribution (DC) scheme or a Retirement Annuity Contract had no choice but to purchase an annuity with their remaining pension pot after drawing down the permissible tax-free retirement lump sum. The ARF arrangement extended the options at retirement so that, in addition to the annuity option, the balance of a pension fund could be taken in cash (subject to tax, as appropriate) or be invested in an ARF, subject to certain conditions.
The ARF option was extended, in Finance Act 2000, to the part of an employee's occupational pension fund built up from Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVCs) and most recently, in Finance Act 2011, it was further extended to cover an employee's entire pension fund where the fund is a defined contribution (DC) occupational pension scheme. The 2011 extension which applied with effect from 6 February 2011 (the date of passing of the Act), was in respect of DC schemes approved by the Revenue Commissioners, on or after that date, under Chapter 1 of Part 30 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. Where DC occupational pension schemes had been approved by Revenue prior to that date, the legislation (section 19(7)(f) of Finance Act 2011) provided that the extension of the ARF option in such cases was conditional on the scheme rules being amended to allow a scheme member exercise the option. The 2011 Finance Act, did not, however, extend the ARF option to the main scheme benefits of defined benefit (DB) occupational schemes.
I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners, that pension retirement bonds, otherwise known as Buy-out-Bonds (BoBs), are single premium insurance policies effected by the trustees of an occupational pension scheme on behalf of a scheme member, as an alternative to providing a preserved retirement benefit under the scheme for that member. They are used in circumstances where a scheme member is leaving service and opts for a transfer value, on the wind-up of a scheme or where pension splitting arises in the context of a Pension Adjustment Order. BoBs are approved by the Commissioners on a generic, rather than individual, basis in the form of a standard bond policy document, under Chapter 1 of Part 30 of the TCA 1997 as DC products. However, in the view of the Commissioners, BoBs are not occupational pension savings vehicles in the normally accepted sense for example, an individual with a BoB cannot make contributions to the BoB. Rather, they are a specialist pension vehicle to deal with the specific situations described above.
I am further advised by the Commissioners that it has always been a condition of approval of generic BoB policies that the benefits to be provided to an individual under such policies be subject to the same restrictions and conditions that applied to the occupational pension scheme from which the transfer to the BoB originated. This includes access to the ARF option. The entitlement to the ARF option, in effect, travels with the transfer value paid into the bond and the fact that the BoB is considered a DC pension product does not, of itself, give entitlement to the ARF option from the BoB as of right. Thus, prior to the Finance Act 2011 changes, the ARF option only applied to benefits under a BoB where the bond holder could have availed of the option under the originating occupational pension scheme, e.g. that the bond holder was a proprietary director before leaving service or that part of the originating transfer represented AVCs. There was no alteration in this position following the Finance Act 2011 changes.
Thus, transfers to BoBs from DB schemes generally, do not have access to the ARF option and transfers from DC schemes that took place either prior to the change in the law in Finance Act 2011 or prior to the required change in the DC scheme rules to permit the ARF option, do not qualify for the option.
In this regard, the question of ARF access from BoBs was specifically considered, in the context of the National Pensions Framework published by the previous Government, by the Implementation Steering Group tasked with progressing the Framework's proposals in relation to flexible options in retirement. In recommending the extension of the ARF option to DC main scheme benefits, the Implementation Steering Group endorsed the then existing position in relation to BoBs i.e. of linking ARF access to the underlying occupational pension scheme from which the transfer value came. In the context of BoBs originating from DB schemes in particular, endorsement of this restrictive stance reflected broader policy concerns about the possible impact that accessing the ARF option by the back door through BoBs might have on DB schemes generally.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the issue of permitting BoB access to the ARF option continues to be raised with my Department and the Revenue Commissioners by representative bodies in the pensions sector. Following a recent meeting in that regard with Insurance Ireland, officials of my Department and the Revenue Commissioners have, without prejudice, undertaken to examine the issue further in conjunction with the Department of Social Protection and the Pensions Board who also have an interest in the broad policy in this area. I will consider any recommendations that may arise from that examination.
171. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 175 of 4 February 2014, if he will provide an answer to the question raised, as his answer on that occasion does not address the issue raised; the reason the non-deductibility of local property tax from private rental income is being excused on the basis that it would reduce the tax base when it is an expense wholly and necessarily incurred in the business of letting private rental property; his views on whether a business cost is a business cost regardless of its impact elsewhere as otherwise it could be argued that anything that reduces exposure to taxation reduces the tax base, whether that be income tax, corporation tax, VAT refunds, personal reliefs and so on; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6730/14]
View answerAs indicated previously to the Deputy, the Inter-departmental group, chaired by Dr Don Thornhill, set up to consider the design of a property tax (the Thornhill Group) recommended that the Local Property Tax paid in respect of a rented property should be deductible for income tax or corporation tax purposes, in a similar manner to commercial rates.
The group recognised the considerable pressures on the public finances and the need to bridge the gap between expenditure and revenue, and, for this reason, suggested that consideration be given to phasing in deductibility over a period of years. The group also considered that it was for Government, having regard to the prevailing budgetary situation, to decide on the time span for phasing-in deductibility and on what percentage of LPT to allow as a deduction from gross rents for tax purposes.
As I have indicated previously, the Government accepted the recommendation of the Thornhill Group in principle. However, the introduction of deductibility would in all likelihood on its own have negative revenue implications in net terms for the Exchequer. Regard has to be had to the implications for the overall budgetary situation of any decision in this regard and, as I have also previously stated, neither the manner nor the time frame for the introduction of deductibility has yet been considered.
172. Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy asked the Minister for Finance the reason a person (details supplied) in County Offaly had to pay universal social charge on a forestry grant which was paid directly to the company that carried out the forestry work; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that they had been advised in writing by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine that USC should not be charged on the forestry grant; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6740/14]
View answerI am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that they inadvertently included a Forestry Establishment Grant when calculating the income of the person (details supplied). Universal Social Charge (USC) was charged on this grant amount and they apologise for this error.
Universal Social Charge is payable only on the subsequent annual forest premium payments earned. However the person (details supplied) is exempt from USC being under the Income threshold. The Revenue Commissioners have arranged to refund all USC paid in 2012 and 2013 and they will write to the person explaining the correct position.
173. Deputy Pat Deering asked the Minister for Finance the reason it is possible for the Revenue Commissioners to deduct local property tax liabilities from jobseeker's payments as with other welfare payments. [6769/14]
View answerPart 10 of the Finance (Local Property Tax) Act 2012 (as amended) provides for payment of the Local Property Tax (LPT) by deduction at source from certain payments made by the Department of Social Protection (DSP). I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that the administrative arrangements concerning deduction of LPT from Department of Social Protection payments were implemented in consultation with that Department. The Commissioners have confirmed that LPT can only be deducted by DSP from the following payments:
- State Pension (Contributory and Non-Contributory),
- Widow/Widower's or Surviving Civil Partner's Pension (Contributory and Non-Contributory),
- State Pension (Transition),
- One-Parent Family Payment,
- Invalidity Pension,
- Carer's Allowance,
- Disability Allowance and
- Blind Pension.
It is not possible to facilitate the deduction of LPT from Jobseeker's benefit payments and the Commissioners understand that there are two particular considerations relating which arose in examining whether to provide a facility for deduction of LPT at source from Jobseekers' Payments. Deduction at source works on the basis that payments are spread evenly over the year. The intermittent nature of certain DSP payments, including jobseeker's payments, means that such payments do not lend themselves to a weekly deduction at source system. A second factor is that the concept of a de minimis payment from DSP is enshrined in legislation which would in many instances make it impossible to deduct LPT at source from such payments. The Commissioners further advise that a person whose only income is a DSP payment will qualify for a deferral of LPT is they wish. I am advised that information on deferral of LPT as well as details of other payment methods are available from the Revenue website or by calling the LPT helpline on 1890 200 255.
174. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide in tabular form the total provisions taken by AIB, EBS, Bank of Ireland, Irish Bank Resolution Corporation and Permanent TSB in respect of residential and buy to let mortgages in each year from 2010 to 2013. [6789/14]
View answer175. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide in tabular form the total write-off of mortgages taken by AIB, EBS, Bank of Ireland, Irish Bank Resolution Corporation and Permanent TSB in respect of residential and buy to let mortgages in each year from 2010 to 2013. [6790/14]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 174 and 175 together.
I can confirm for the Deputy that I have received the following responses from the banks in relation to Parliamentary Questions 6789/14 and 6790/14 relating to mortgage provisions and mortgage write-offs taken by the banks over the period 2010 to 2013:
Allied Irish Banks (including EBS):
All of AIB's disclosures in relation to its mortgage portfolios for 2013 will be available during March 2014 following the publication of AIB's 2013 Annual Results. Disclosures in relation to AIB's mortgage portfolios for 2010,2011,2012 and half year 2013 are contained in its Annual and Half-Yearly Financial Reports for those years. All reports are available on AIB's website www.aibgroup.com/investorrelations.
Bank of Ireland:
Bank of Ireland's financial statements give comprehensive disclosures on its Residential Mortgage portfolios. In relation to impairment charges on its residential mortgage books during the period from 2010 through to 2013, please see the following disclosures:
|
Year |
Statement |
|
2010 |
Financial statements for year ended 31 December 2011 p16, 33 and 39 |
|
2011 |
Financial statements for year ended 31 December 2011 p16, 33 and 39 |
|
2012 |
Financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2012 p16 Investor presentation for the year ended 31 December 2012 p24,25 and 26 |
|
2013* |
Interim financial statements for the six month period ended 30 June 2013 p13 Interim investor presentation for the six month period ended 30 June 2013 p24, 25 and 26 |
In relation to amounts written off on its residential mortgage books during the period from 2010 through to 2013, please see the following disclosures:
|
Year |
Statement |
|
2010 |
Financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2011 p246 and 247 |
|
2011 |
Financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2011 p246 and 247 |
|
2012 |
Financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2012 p207 |
|
2013* |
Interim financial statements for the six month period ended 30 June 2013 p89 |
*Bank of Ireland will release its full year results on 3 March 2014.
Permanent TSB:
Permanent TSB provides extensive disclosure on its residential mortgage portfolio in its annual and interim accounts which are available on Permanent TSB's website http://www.permanenttsbgroup.ie/investor-relations/reports-and-presentations/annual-and-interim-reports/2013.aspx. The following tables set out the key breakdowns sought. As Permanent TSB is in a closed period at present it is not appropriate to disclose financial information for the full year of 2013. This information will be included in the Group's Annual Report and Financial Statements which will be published in March 2014.
Total Provision Charge for ROI Residential Mortgages:
|
€ million |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
|
Home Loan |
155 |
580 |
284 |
|
Buy To Let |
88 |
591 |
224 |
|
Total |
243 |
1,171 |
490 |
Mortgage Total Write Offs:
|
€ million |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
|
Home Loan |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
Buy To Let |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
Total |
0 |
2 |
2 |
Permanent TSB advises that write-downs are agreed with customers only at the end of a process where other options are not sustainable and customers have engaged fully with the bank.
IBRC in SL:
I have been advised by the Special Liquidators that the information requested is commercially sensitive and that it would not be appropriate for the Special Liquidators to release information outside of that already published in IBRC s accounts. The Special Liquidators will not be publishing any confidential commercially sensitive financial information which could potentially have a detrimental impact on asset recovery in the impending sales process.
176. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide details of all official engagements by him or the Ministers of State in his Department that have taken place in Northern Ireland since he took office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6818/14]
View answerAs Minister for Finance, I have attended numerous official engagements in Northern Ireland over the course of this Government's time in office. This interaction plays an important role in building and maintaining our relationship with our colleagues in the North. The official engagements undertaken by myself include attendance at the North/South Ministerial Council in Armagh on the 18th November 2011, 2nd November 2012 and the 8th November 2013.
I also met with First Minister Peter Robinson and Minister Simon Hamilton at Stormont Castle on the 27th September 2013 and gave a Speech at the Confederation of British Industry in the Titanic Quarter on the 27th September 2013.
All official engagements undertaken by Minister of State Brian Hayes will be answered as part of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform's response to this parliamentary question.
177. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance in the context of the single person child carer credit, if a secondary claimant who meets all the qualifying criteria may be entitled to the credit in circumstances where the primary claimant is now cohabiting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6830/14]
View answerThe new Single Person Child Carer Tax Credit is more targeted than its predecessor in that it is, in the first instance, only available to the principal carer of the child.
The person who receives the child benefit payment is being used as the initial indicator by the Revenue Commissioners to identify the individuals who are likely to qualify for the new credit. However, the credit will in the first place go to the person who cares for the child for most of the year. Agreement as to who will be the principal carer of a child is a matter for the parents or guardians.
Where a principal carer is married, in a civil partnership or cohabiting they would not be entitled to the new credit (or indeed the former one). In such circumstances the primary carer cannot relinquish the credit to a secondary carer. In addition, a secondary carer who is married, in a civil partnership or cohabiting, would not be entitled to the new credit (or indeed the former one) regardless of the marital status of the primary carer.
178. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 214 of 28 January 2014, from where the requirement for mandatory proportional early repayments to the EFSF, EFSM, United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark arises, should Ireland decide to repay IMF loans prior to their maturity date; if the provision is included in the memorandum of understanding for the EU-IMF programme; if he has considered requesting Ireland to be excused from this provision and, in so doing, allow it to take advantage of current lower bond yields; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6839/14]
View answerIreland has borrowed €22.5 billion from the IMF in 12 tranches and these will be amortised (paid back in instalments) in varying amounts from July 2015 to December 2023 when the final payment on the last tranche drawn down will be made. The requirement for mandatory proportional early repayments in the event that IMF loans were to be repaid early, to which I referred in my reply to PQ 214 of 28 January 2014, arises from the provisions of the respective loan agreements and financial assistance facility agreements with the EFSF, EFSM, United Kingdom, Kingdom of Sweden and Kingdom of Denmark
In the case of the EFSF loans, the provision is included in the Loan Facility Agreement and Financial Assistance Facility Agreements covering these loans. The provision in the Master Financial Assistance Facility dated 30 March 2012 is as follows:
"Section 7.2
If financing granted to the Beneficiary Member State under the IMF Arrangement or the EFSM Loan Facility Agreement, any of the facilities provided by the Financial Support Providers, the IMF, the European Union (or any body or institution thereof) or any of the facilities described in Preamble (4), (5), (6) or (7) to this Agreement is repaid by the Beneficiary Member State in advance in whole or in part on a voluntary or mandatory basis, a proportional amount of the Financial Assistance Amounts of the Financial Assistance provided under this Agreement together with accrued interest and all other amounts due in respect thereof shall become immediately due and repayable in a proportionate amount."
For the EFSM loans the reference is in Section 7.3 of the Loan Facility Agreement dated 16 December 2010 (as subsequently amended):
"If financing granted to the Borrower under the IMF Arrangement or the EFSF Loan Agreement or under any of the Financial Support Provider Loan Agreements is repaid in advance in whole or in part on a voluntary or mandatory basis, a proportional amount of the Loan disbursed under this Agreement shall become immediately due and repayable in a proportionate amount established by reference to the proportion which the principal sum repaid in advance in respect of the relevant facility represents to the aggregate principal amount outstanding in respect of such facility immediately prior to such repayment in advance. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision shall not apply to any repayment under the EFSF Loan Agreement to finance the creation of the loan specific cash buffer.
The Borrower shall reimburse all costs, expenses, fees and loss of interest incurred and payable by the Lender as a consequence of an early repayment of any Tranche under this Clause."
The relevant reference for the bilateral loan from the United Kingdom can be found at Section 7.1 (b) of the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement of 4th October 2012:
"If the Borrower makes a prepayment under a Support Facility, the Borrower must prepay the Loans in a pro rata amount."
In the case of the Kingdom of Denmark the reference is at Section 7.1.2 of the Loan Agreement dated March 21 2012:
"If the Borrower makes a prepayment under a Support Facility, the Borrower must prepay the Loans in a pro rata amount."
Similarly, for the Kingdom of Sweden the reference is at Section 7.1.2 of the Loan Agreement dated 11th May 2012:
"If the Borrower makes a prepayment under a Support Facility, the Borrower must prepay the Loans in a pro rata amount."
I would note that the Loan Agreements with Sweden and Denmark have been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas on 28 March 2012 and 30 April 2012 respectively, while that with the UK is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/bilateral-loan-to-ireland. In addition, the draft Master Financial Assistance Facility Agreement with the EFSF was laid before both Houses on 28 March 2012.
As I said in my reply to PQ 214 of 28 January 2014:
"The question of early repayment of any one lender cannot therefore be treated in isolation from other lenders and market expectations for when programme loans are due to be repaid." I should also point out that, as the IMF loans have a shorter average maturity, they will be repaid considerably in advance of the EFSF and EFSM loans for which we negotiated maturity extensions.
It should be noted that the matter of replacing IMF monies with market funding and the impact this might have on our bond yields would need to be carefully considered were such a possibility to arise. Such early repayment of our IMF loans does not arise at the moment but we will keep it under review. Should that possibility arise, I would take the advice of the NTMA. If such a proposal were to be pursued, the agreement of the other lenders would of course be required.
