Tax Avoidance

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 19 May 2015

Tuesday, 19 May 2015

Questions (123)

Pat Rabbitte

Question:

123. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 152 of 6 May 2015, the number of times in each of the past ten years a penalty was imposed on an employer under section 987 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, as amended, for failure to comply with regulations under Chapter 4 of Part 42 relating to the collection and recovery of income tax under the pay as you earn system, in circumstances where a failure to keep and maintain a register of employees or to deduct and remit income tax in relation to employees arose from a misclassification by the employer of employees as being self-employed; the number of times an employer was prosecuted under section 1078 of the Taxes Consolidation Act, as amended, for knowing or wilful delivery or issuing of incorrect returns, statements, accounts or invoices, entailing a representation by the employer that certain employees were self-employed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19405/15]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that while they capture the various constituents of yield from their compliance interventions (income tax/PRSI/USC that ought to have been collected by employers under the PAYE system plus interest on late payment and penalties) involving non-operation by employers of the PAYE system, their records do not capture each of the separate or specific types of contraventions and penalties relating to those contraventions.  On that basis, the more granular information sought by the Deputy as a follow up to Parliamentary Question No. 152 of 6 May 2015 is not available.

I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that, while criminal prosecutions have been initiated against those filing incorrect returns, statements, accounts or invoices, such prosecutions did not arise solely from incorrect employer PAYE returns, records, etc. relating to payments made tax-free to individuals when such payments should have been made through the PAYE system. 

I am further informed that the question of whether a contract between parties is one of a contract of service [i.e. an employee] or a contract for service [i.e. self-employed] depends on the facts and circumstances of each case and these are primarily matters to be discussed between the parties to the contract.  As explained in my reply to Question No. 152 on 6 May 2015, when conducting compliance interventions, Revenue will take action to recover unpaid tax, interest, and penalties where warranted, in cases where there has been mis-classification of the status of the person carrying out the work on a contract.