Written Answers Nos. 51 - 70
51. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection the position regarding an application for a one-parent allowance in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20983/15]
View answerThe application for a one-parent family payment from the person concerned has been awarded. Payment including arrears will issue on 27 May 2015.
52. Deputy Paul J. Connaughton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection the reason the work allowance for persons on jobseeker's transitional is €60 whereas the work allowance for one-parent family payment is €90; if a case can be made for a single parent who formerly received the one-parent family payment, but who now receives the jobseeker's transitional payment, to continue to receive the work allowance at the higher rate; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21003/15]
View answerThe jobseeker’s transitional payment was introduced by the Social Welfare and Pensions (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2013, as a special arrangement under the jobseeker’s allowance (JA) scheme for lone parents who have a youngest child aged 7 to 13 years inclusive.
Lone parents who are in receipt of the jobseeker’s transitional payment are exempt from the JA scheme conditions that require them to be available for, and genuinely seeking, full-time work. They can work part-time without restrictions, participate in education and still receive the transitional payment – subject to a means test. As such, the jobseeker’s transitional payment takes into account the specific caring responsibilities of these customers, allows them to balance their work and caring responsibilities and, significantly, reduces their requirement for child care.
As the jobseeker’s transitional payment is part of the JA scheme, both its means test and its maximum weekly rate of payment are the same as that of the JA payment. Income from work is assessed with an earnings disregard of €20 per day of employment, up to a maximum of €60 per week, and any income above that is assessed at 60%.
Recipients of the jobseeker’s transitional payment also have access to the Department’s range of Intreo services, and to related supports, to enable them to become job-ready and/or to find employment. This includes a one to one meeting with one of the Department’s case officers who will assist them to produce a personal development plan to progress into education, training and/or employment. The case officer will then support them to implement this plan by providing them with access to the wide range of educational and employment supports that are available within the Department.
53. Deputy Martin Heydon asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection if a medical assessment will be scheduled for an appeal in respect of an illness benefit for a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21028/15]
View answerPayment of illness benefit to the person concerned was disallowed by a Deciding Officer following an examination by a Medical Assessor of the Department who expressed the opinion that he was capable of work.
An appeal was registered on 7 May 2015 and the Social Welfare Appeals Office has advised me that, in accordance with statutory requirements, the Department has been asked to provide the documentation in the case and the Deciding Officer’s comments on the grounds of the appeal. In that context, an assessment by another Medical Assessor will be carried out. When these have been received from the Department, the case in question will be referred to an Appeals Officer who will make a summary decision on the appeal based on the documentary evidence presented or, if required, hold an oral appeal hearing.
The Social Welfare Appeals Office functions independently of the Minister for Social Protection and of the Department and is responsible for determining appeals against decisions in relation to social welfare entitlements.
54. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Finance the rules for approved retirement funds; the terms and conditions in relation to tax due on accumulative funds, and on the changes made to these funds from 1 January 2015; if he will reconsider these changes in budget 2016; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20877/15]
View answerFlexible options at retirement (the so-called "ARF option") are available in respect of all benefits from Defined Contribution (DC) retirement benefit schemes and other DC-based pension savings. Choices available to individuals (after taking the tax-free retirement lump sum) include the option to purchase an annuity with the remaining funds, to receive the balance of the pension funds in cash (subject to marginal rate income tax, as appropriate), to invest in an approved retirement fund (ARF) or an Approved Minimum Retirement Fund (AMRF), once certain conditions are met.
Finance Act 2014 introduced changes relating to the imputed distribution rate for certain ARFs as well as provisions to allow owners of AMRFs to draw-down up to 4% of the assets of such funds on one occasion in each year instead of the facility to draw-down the accrued income and gains of such funds, as had applied heretofore.
A system of imputed distributions of the value of ARF assets was introduced because an internal review of tax relief for pensions provision undertaken by my Department and the Revenue Commissioners in 2005 found that the ARF option was largely not being used as intended to fund an income stream in retirement but was, instead, being used to build up funds in a tax-free environment over the long-term. In an effort to counteract this, Budget and Finance Act 2006 introduced, with effect from 2007, an imputed or notional distribution of 3% of the value of the assets of an ARF on 31 December each year (subsequently changed to 30 November each year). The notional distribution arrangement only applies where the ARF owner is 60 years or over for the whole of a tax year. The notional distribution was phased in over the period 2007 to 2009, with 1% applying in 2007, 2% in 2008 and the full 3% from 2009. The notional amount is taxed at the ARF owner's marginal income tax rate. Funds actually drawn down by ARF owners are credited against the imputed distribution in that year to arrive at a net imputed amount, if any, for the year. Budget and Finance Act 2011 increased the rate of the notional distribution to 5% of the value of the assets of an ARF, while Finance Act 2012 further increased the rate to 6% in respect of ARFs with values over €2 million.
Finance Act 2014 reduced the annual imputed ARF distribution rate from 5% to 4% for ARF owners in the age group 60 to 70 years whose ARFs have assets of €2 million or under. This change was introduced in order to reduce the risk that individuals in that age group might outlive the funds in their ARFs.
As regards the changes to AMRF access, I should explain by way of background, that under the flexible options at retirement arrangements, where an individual in a DC pension savings arrangement is under age 75 at the time of exercising the option and does not meet the guaranteed pension income requirement of €12,700 per annum, that individual must place a maximum "set aside" amount of €63,500 (or the remainder of the pension funds if less than €63,500 after taking the retirement lump sum) in an AMRF or purchase an annuity with the €63,500.
Any amount of remaining pension funds in excess of €63,500 can be invested in an ARF with access to those funds at the owner's discretion (subject to tax, at the marginal rate and having regard to the imputed distribution requirements).
The purpose of the AMRF is to ensure that an individual without the minimum guaranteed pension income for life has a pension "nest-egg" to provide for the latter years of his/her retirement. Up to Finance Act 2014, the capital invested in an AMRF could not be accessed until the AMRF owner reached age 75 (or meets the guaranteed pension income requirement before then) at which point the AMRF becomes an ARF with unrestricted access to the funds, subject to taxation. While the capital sum in an AMRF could not be accessed, as set out, any income, profits or gains accrued from the investment of the capital could, up to now, be withdrawn by the AMRF owner, subject to tax at the marginal rate.
I decided to change the arrangements for AMRFs so as to allow AMRF owners voluntary, tax-liable access to a maximum of 4% of their AMRF assets each year up to the point at which the AMRF becomes an ARF. This change provides AMRF owners with access to a definitive and certain level of income from their AMRF rather than the uncertain level of income which access to the accrued income, profits and gains in the AMRF provided.
Under the previous access arrangements for AMRFs, the extent of any income, profit or gains would depend on the performance of the investment options taken and could, therefore, be highly volatile with the possibility of little or no gains accruing in certain years. In addition, the scale of the capital allowed for in an AMRF, at €63,500, would not always permit for investment returns of any significant scale to be made using a prudent investment policy.
The change allowing access to a specified percentage of the capital in an AMRF is primarily aimed at those individuals whose AMRF constitutes a significant part of their retirement funds and who, while not wishing to purchase a pension annuity with those funds, may require access to a portion of these funds to provide a more certain form of supplementary pension income prior to reaching age 75. This facility also ensures that an individual will have some remaining funds in the AMRF at age 75 to provide for their remaining years, assuming the individual has not purchased a pension annuity in the meantime.
Individuals whose AMRF represents a less significant part of their retirement funds and whose circumstances would allow for greater investment risk and, therefore, potentially greater investment returns will be limited to the 4% level of asset draw down. However, this draw down will also be available to them for periods when their AMRF investments make losses or returns of less than 4% of the value of their AMRF assets and where, under the previous arrangement, they would not have been able to make a draw down or the draw down would have been of a lesser value than will now be permitted. I consider that the change will be to the benefit of AMRF owners, generally, over the medium to longer term and I have no plans to reverse it.
55. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the total fines imposed by the Central Bank of Ireland on financial institutions since 2011; and if he will provide details of each fine. [20895/15]
View answerPart IIIC of the Central Bank Act 1942, as amended, provides the Central Bank of Ireland with the power to impose sanctions in respect of the commission of a prescribed contravention by regulated financial service providers and by persons concerned in the management of a regulated financial service provider.
Since the commencement of the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013, the Central Bank may impose a monetary penalty upon a body corporate or an unincorporated body of the greater of €10,000,000 or an amount equal to 10 per cent of the turnover of a firm. In relation to breaches that arose prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act, the maximum penalty that the Central Bank could impose on a firm was €5,000,000. The 2013 Act also allowed for the doubling of the maximum administrative sanction to €1,000,000 for a natural person.
The Central Bank's Strategic Plan 2013 - 2015 sets out a strategy of assertive risk-based supervision underpinned by a credible threat of enforcement. Enforcement is an important tool to effect deterrence, achieve compliance and promote positive behaviour. The Central Bank will take enforcement action against regulated entities under its Probability Risk and Impact SysteM (PRISM) supervisory model.
I have been informed by the Central Bank that since 2011 a total of €27,168,565 in fines has been imposed. A total of 54 cases have been taken during this period in which fines were imposed. Details of each case are available on the Central Bank website. The Central Bank has provided my Department with the following summary table.
|
2011 |
- |
|
Settlements |
9 |
|
Monetary Sanctions |
€5,050,000 |
|
No. |
Case |
Issue |
Monetary Sanctions |
Date of Publication |
|
1 |
Scotiabank (Ireland) Limited |
Regulation 16 of the European Communities (Licensing and Supervision of Credit Institutions) Regulations 1992 and section 10 of the Central Bank Act 1971 |
€600,000 |
02/06/2011 |
|
2 |
MBNA Europe Bank Limited |
Breaches of regulatory requirements contained in the Consumer Protection Code - This case involved the application of interest to credit card accounts in error resulting in customers being overcharged a total of €16,997,321.49. All affected customers were remediated by the Firm with appropriate interest |
€750,000 |
21/06/2011 |
|
3 |
Aviva Investors Ireland Limited |
Breaches of regulatory requirements contained in the Client Asset Requirements |
€30,000 |
20/07/2011 |
|
4 |
Pan Index Limited |
Regulations 76 and 94 of the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 |
€40,000 |
25/08/2011 |
|
5 |
Goldman Sachs Bank (Europe) plc |
Regulation 16(3) of the European Communities (Licensing and Supervision of Credit Institutions) Regulations |
€160,000 |
08/09/2011 |
|
6 |
McSharry & Foley (Sligo) Limited |
Consumer Protection Code and the Handbook for Authorised Advisors - This case involved, inter alia, issues regarding the application of charges to rebate amounts due to customers and the application of fees in excess of the maximum fees advised on the Firm's Terms of Business document. Refunds with appropriate interest were made to all affected customers. |
€10,000 |
24/10/2011 |
|
7 |
J & E Davy t/a Davy |
Regulations 112 and 33(1)(a) of the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 |
€50,000 |
08/12/2011 |
|
8 |
Susquehanna International Securities Limited |
Regulations 112 and 33(1)(a) of the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 |
€60,000 |
13/12/2011
|
|
9 |
Combined Insurance Company of Europe Limited |
Various breaches of the Consumer Protection Code (2006) - This case involved, inter alia, issues regarding the suitability of products sold to customers, the behaviour of tied agents and contingency selling. A substantial remediation programme was put in place that refunded an estimated €2,150,744 in respect of approximately 7,917 policies |
€3,350,000 |
16/12/2011 |
|
2012 |
- |
|
Settlements |
16 |
|
Monetary Sanctions |
€8,492,900 |
|
No |
Case |
Issue |
Monetary Sanctions |
Date of Publication |
|
1 |
Aviva Life & Pensions Ireland Limited |
Consumer Protection Code of 1 August 2006 |
€245,000 |
07/03/2012 |
|
2 |
Aviva Health Insurance Ireland Limited |
Consumer Protection Code of 1 August 2006 |
€245,000 |
09/03/2012 |
|
3 |
Merrion Stockbrokers Limited |
Regulations 112 and 33(1)(a) of the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 |
€65,000 |
21/03/2012 |
|
4 |
Hitachi Capital Insurance Europe Limited |
Section 24(1) of the Insurance Act 1989 (as amended) |
€25,000 |
27/03/2012 |
|
5 |
Alico Life International Limited |
Various breaches of the Insurance Act 1989, as amended ("the Act") and the European Communities (Life Assurance) Framework Regulations 1994, as amended |
€3,200,000 |
29/03/2012 |
|
6 |
UBS International Life Limited |
Various breaches of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010 |
€65,000 |
19/06/2012 |
|
7 |
Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank |
Section 31(3) of the Asset Covered Securities Act 2001 (as amended) and Regulation 16 of the European Communities (Licensing and Supervision of Credit Institutions) Regulations 1992 (as amended) |
€120,000 |
02/10/2012 |
|
8 |
Irish Mortgage Corporation t/a Moneyzone |
The Consumer Protection Code (2006)(the "Code") and the Minimum Competency Requirements (July 2006) |
€65,000 |
24/10/2012 |
|
9 |
Maurice Buckley t/a Maurice Buckley Insurance Investment Services |
European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 (as amended) |
€800 |
24/10/2012 |
|
10 |
Gerard Geraghty t/a Geraghty & Co. |
European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 (as amended) |
€1,100 |
25/10/2012 |
|
11 |
Ulster Bank Ireland Limited |
Requirements for the Management of Liquidity Risk (June 2009) and the European Communities (Capital Adequacy of Credit Institutions) Regulations 2006 |
€1,960,000 |
14/11/2012 |
|
12 |
ICON plc |
2009 Market Abuse Rules |
€10,000 |
21/11/2012 |
|
13 |
Dolmen Stockbrokers Limited |
Regulation 13(1) of the Market Abuse Regulations 2005 |
€20,000 |
12/12/2012 |
|
14 |
Community Credit Union Limited |
Various breaches of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010 |
€21,000 |
13/12/2012 |
|
15 |
Aviva Insurance Europe SE |
Regulation 10(3) of the European Communities (Life Assurance) Framework Regulations 1994 |
€1,225,000 |
17/12/2012 |
|
16 |
Aviva Life & Pensions Ireland Limited |
Regulation 10(3) of the European Communities (Life Assurance) Framework Regulations 1994 |
€1,225,000 |
17/12/2012 |
|
2013 |
- |
|
Settlements |
16 |
|
Monetary Sanctions |
€6,348,215 |
|
No |
Case |
Issue |
Monetary Sanctions |
Date of Publication |
|
1 |
MacDonagh Boland Crotty MacRedmond Limited t/a Aon MacDonagh Boland |
Breaches of the Handbook for Authorised Advisors and the Consumer Protection Code (2006) - This case involved breaches related to the failure to transfer premium rebates, the deduction of fees from premium rebates and the failure to ensure the repayment of premium overpayments. All affected customers were repaid by the Firm with interest. |
€65,000 |
22/01/2013 |
|
2 |
C&C Group plc |
Breaches of the insider list requirements of the Market Abuse (Directive 2003/6/EC) Regulations 2005 (as amended) and the Market Abuse Rules issued by the Central Bank in February 2006 and September 2008 |
€90,000 |
01/02/2013 |
|
3 |
Quinn Insurance Limited (Under Administration) |
Breaches of article 10(3) and article 13(1)(b) of the European Communities (Non-Life Insurance) Framework Regulations 1994, as amended |
€5,000,000* |
18/02/2013 |
|
4 |
John D. O'Connor t/a John D. O'Connor Financial Services |
Breach of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 (as amended) |
€1,100 |
06/03/2013 |
|
5 |
Susquehanna International Securities Limited |
Breaches of Regulations 112 and 33(1)(a) of the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 |
€78,000 |
25/06/2013 |
|
6 |
Smyths Insurance Brokers Limited and Raymond Smyth |
Breaches of regulatory requirements contained in the Consumer Protection Code |
€12,000 |
10/09/2013 |
|
7 |
Oxendale & Co Limited |
Breach of the Consumer Protection Code for Licensed Moneylenders |
€8,000 |
18/09/2013 |
|
8 |
AXA MPS Financial Limited |
Breaches of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering & Terrorist Financing) Act 2010 |
€50,000 |
08/10/2013 |
|
9 |
MOD Financial Services Limited |
Breach of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 |
€420 |
22/11/2013 |
|
10 |
Ryan Motor Power Limited |
Breach of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005. |
€1,000 |
22/11/2013 |
|
11 |
Stephen Redmond t/a SJ Redmond & Associates |
Breach of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 |
€520 |
22/11/2013 |
|
12 |
Rocklands Financial Limited |
Breach of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 |
€650 |
22/11/2013 |
|
13 |
P Walpole & Sons Limited t/a Central Motors |
Breach of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 |
€525 |
22/11/2013 |
|
14 |
John Campbell t/a Campbell Financial Services |
Breach of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 |
€1,000 |
22/11/2013 |
|
15 |
CitiBank Europe plc |
Contraventions of the Central Bank's Requirements for the Management of Liquidity Risk and the European Communities (Licensing and Supervision of Credit Institutions) Regulations 1992 (S.I. 395 of 1992) |
€550,000 |
11/12/2013 |
|
16 |
Allied Irish Banks plc |
Contraventions of the Central Bank's Requirements for the Management of Liquidity Risk and the European Communities (Licensing and Supervision of Credit Institutions) Regulations 1992 (S.I. 395 of 1992) |
€490,000 |
17/12/2013
|
*In relation to the Quinn Insurance Limited case, the Central Bank considered that the contraventions committed by the firm merited the maximum monetary penalty that can be levied by the Central Bank on a regulated financial services provider, namely €5 million in this case. However, the firm was under administration and was entirely reliant on funding from the Insurance Compensation Fund. In these wholly exceptional circumstances, the Central Bank decided to waive the monetary penalty in its entirety in the public interest.
|
2014 |
- |
|
Settlements |
11 |
|
Monetary Sanctions |
€5,422,450 |
|
No |
Case |
Issue |
Monetary Sanctions |
Date of Publication |
|
1 |
Provident Personal Credit Limited trading as Provident |
Breaches of Section 99 of the Consumer Credit Act, 1995 in relation to the provision of "top-up" loans being used to pay off previous loans. |
€105,000 |
01/12/2014 |
|
2 |
Ulster Bank Ireland Limited |
Breach of Regulation 16 of the European Communities (Licensing and Supervision of Credit Institutions) Regulations 1992 (S.I. No. 395 of 1992) |
€3,500,000 |
12/11/2014 |
|
3 |
Seamus McGrath t/a Seamus McGrath Financial Services |
Failure to hold the required level of PII cover under Regulation 17 of the IMR. |
€900 |
17/10/2014 |
|
4 |
E. Tarrant & Sons (Car Sales) Limited |
Failure to hold the required level of PII cover under Regulation 17 of the IMR.
|
€910 |
16/10/2014 |
|
5
|
Bank of Montreal Ireland plc |
Breach of Credit Institutions) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 661/2006) (as amended) (the "2006 Regulations") and of the European Communities (Licensing and Supervision of Credit Institutions) Regulations 1992 (S.I. 395/1992) (the "1992 Regulations"). |
€650,000
|
29/05/2014 |
|
6 |
Squared Financial Services Limited |
Breach of the European Communities (Capital Adequacy of Credit Institutions) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 661 of 2006) (the "Capital Adequacy Regulations") and the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 (S.I. 60 of 2007) (the "MiFID Regulations"). |
€100,000 |
21/05/2014 |
|
7 |
FBD Insurance plc |
Breaches of regulatory requirements contained in the Consumer Protection Code 2006. |
€490,000
|
08/05/2014 |
|
8 |
LGT Capital Partners (Ireland) Limited |
Breach of Regulation 16 & 18 of the EC (Capital Adequacy of Investment Firms) Regulations 2006 & Regulation 33 (1)(f) of EC (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007
|
€95,000
|
31/03/2014 |
|
9 |
Anthony Henneberry t/a Anthony Henneberry Financial Services |
Contravention of Regulation 17(1) of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 (IMR) |
€640 |
14/03/2014 |
|
10 |
UniCredit Bank Ireland plc
|
Breaches of the Large Exposure rules contained in the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD 2006/48/EC as amended). |
€315,000 |
13/03/2014 |
|
11 |
Ava Capital Markets Limited |
Breach of Regulation 112 of Markets in Financial Instruments Regulations 2007 (MiFID) - transaction reporting requirements |
€165,000 |
06/03/2014 |
|
2015 |
- |
|
Settlements |
2 |
|
Monetary Sanctions |
€1,855,000 |
|
No |
Case |
Issue |
Monetary Sanctions |
Date of Publication |
|
1 |
Mr Tadgh Gunnell (PCM Bloxham Stockbrokers) |
Breach of Regulation 9 & 16 of the EC (Capital Adequacy of Investment Firms)Regulations SI 660 of 2006 in failing to maintain minimum regulatory capital. Failure to submit correct information in the COREPs and FINREPS. |
€105,000** |
21/05/2015 |
|
2 |
Western Union Payment Services Ireland Limited |
Breaches of Section 54 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Justice Act 2010 (6 separate contraventions in relation to failures to have robust policies and procedures with respect to a) Outsourcing, b) CDD record retention, c) IT Systems to monitor and identify suspicious activity and d) Training on AML/CTF). Breach of Section 54 (6) of the Criminal Justice Act 2010 (initial and follow on training of agents) and Breach of Section 55 of the Criminal Justice Act 2010 (Failure to retain copies of documents used to verify identity). |
€1,750,000 |
19/05/2015 |
**In relation to the Mr Tadgh Gunnell case, the Central Bank considered that the actions of Mr Gunnell also merited a monetary penalty of €105,000.00 being imposed on him. However on the basis that Mr Gunnell was adjudicated bankrupt by the High Court on 26 January 2015, this monetary penalty was waived.
56. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of persons, for each year since 2008, who have been disqualified from being a person concerned in the management of a regulated financial service provider; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20901/15]
View answerPart IIIC of the Central Bank Act 1942, as amended, provides the Central Bank of Ireland with the power to impose sanctions in respect of the commission of a prescribed contravention by regulated financial service providers and by persons concerned in the management of a regulated financial service provider.
In respect of persons concerned in the management of a regulated financial service provider, Section 33AQ of the Central Bank Act 1942, as amended, provides a range of possible administrative sanctions that the Central Bank may impose including:
- a caution or reprimand,
- a monetary penalty,
- disqualification from being concerned in the management of a regulated financial service provider for a specified period
- a direction to cease participating in the commission of the contravention
- a direction to pay the Central Bank's costs.
In relation to the monetary penalty, the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013 allowed for the doubling of the maximum monetary penalty that can be imposed on an individual to €1,000,000.
In 2011 the new fitness and probity regime was rolled out by the Central Bank in accordance with the provisions of the Central Bank Reform Act 2010. The regime provides for new powers to be exercised by the Central Bank to ensure the fitness and probity of nominees to key positions within financial service providers and of key office-holders within those providers.
I have been informed by the Central Bank that since 2008 a total of 7 disqualifications have been imposed by the Central Bank. Details of each disqualification are available on the Central Bank website. The disqualifications are summarised in the following table.
|
Year |
Disqualification Period |
Number of Persons Disqualified |
|
2008 |
5 years 1 year |
2 |
|
2009 |
2 years |
1 |
|
2011 |
3 years and 6 months 3 years and 6 months |
2 |
|
2013 |
3 years |
1 |
|
2015 |
10 years |
1 |
57. Deputy Colm Keaveney asked the Minister for Finance his views on altering the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994, in order to permit vehicles to be purchased from parties other than authorised dealers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20929/15]
View answerThe legislation governing the Drivers & Passengers with Disabilities Scheme is contained in Section 92 of the Finance Act 1989 (as amended), Section 134(3) of the Finance Act 1992 (as amended) and the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994 (S.I. 353 of 1994).
Regulations 8, 10 and 12 of S.I 353 of 1994 require that a beneficiary of the Scheme must purchase a vehicle from an 'authorised person'. An 'authorised person' refers to a person authorised under Section 136 of the Finance Act 1992 such as, for example, a car dealership. At present, a vehicle which is purchased privately in the State rather than from an authorised person does not qualify for any relief under the scheme.
The 'authorised person' requirement was included in the 1994 Regulations to ensure that refunds on vehicle purchases would be confined to invoiced sales by a VAT-registered car dealer.
I can inform the Deputy that I have recently instructed my officials to conduct a limited examination of the Scheme with a view to improving its functionality. This examination includes the 'authorised person' requirement. I expect to be in a position very soon to inform the Deputy of the outcome of this examination and my decision in the matter.
58. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance further to Question No. 44 of 25 March 2015, if the information requested can be provided on a Dublin basis and a rest of the State basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20932/15]
View answerI understand that the information returned to Revenue indicates what Local Property Tax band a property fell into in 2013 rather than its actual value or its value in the current market. Therefore, any yield estimate made on the basis of this information would involve wide margins of error. I do not consider that it would be helpful in the circumstances to hypothesise in advance of the outcome of the review of the Local Property Tax that is currently underway.
59. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if his Department consulted with external economists prior to its submission to the Low Pay Commission on the national minimum wage; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20943/15]
View answerIn March, the Low Pay Commission issued a request for submissions, seeking the views of individuals and bodies with an interest in the minimum wage, as part of a public consultation process. In response to this request, and given my Department's responsibility for economic policy advice, the Department's Economics Division developed a submission internally which was subsequently forwarded to the Commission and has been published on the Department's website. The Department's submission addressed, among other issues, the need to establish the evidence base on which decisions around the Minimum Wage would be grounded, competitiveness considerations and international comparisons.
The Low Pay Commission's request for submissions from the public was open to individuals and bodies. I understand that over 40 submissions were received by the Commission from a variety of individuals and organisations. It will be a matter for the Low Pay Commission to consider the views expressed in the submissions presented to it as part of its deliberations on the Minimum Wage.
60. Deputy Billy Kelleher asked the Minister for Finance the amount of outstanding uncollected taxes; the proportion of same the Revenue Commissioners expect to recover; if new measures are planned to assist in the collection of outstanding taxes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20945/15]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that the total amount of outstanding uncollected taxes at 31 March 2015 was €1,695 million. This amount represents a reduction of €145 million (8%) on the equivalent 31 March 2014 figure. The total 'debt available for collection' (DAC) figure at that point (31 March 2015) was €907 million, which is a reduction of €102 million (10%) on the equivalent 2014 figure.
The DAC figure, which is in line with other comparable jurisdictions, is a more accurate indicator of progress on tax debt reduction because it excludes elements of the overall amount that are beyond Revenue's control. These elements include debts that are under appeal to the Appeal Commissioners or the Circuit Court or that are subject to the various insolvency processes. Approximately €384 million of the €907 million DAC figure is already subject to collection enforcement activity while a further €112 million is controlled under phased payment agreements between Revenue and the taxpayers in question. These phased payment concessions are only granted to taxpayers or businesses that are viable and have proved their capacity to meet the terms of any such agreement. The remaining €411 million is relatively new debt that is at various stages in the pre-enforcement collection cycle. This cycle can include, for example, discussions with the taxpayer or may involve the issuing of a 'final demand' for payment, which is a precursor to enforcement that affords the defaulter a finite period of time to get his/her affairs in order.
Revenue has successfully reduced the DAC figure by over €536 million since the economic downturn peaked in 2009 and on that basis I am happy that the balanced approach of limited debt rescheduling combined with early enforcement action where compliance is not forthcoming is delivering strong results.
Revenue has confirmed to me that it anticipates the current approach will deliver further positive outcomes in the coming year and I have no plans to introduce any changes at this time.
61. Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor asked the Minister for Finance his views on removing value added tax on defibrillators; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20950/15]
View answerThe VAT rating of goods and services is constrained by the requirements of EU VAT law with which Irish VAT law must comply. Defibrillators, other than implantable defibrillators, are liable to VAT at the standard rate of 23%. Parts or accessories and training are also liable to VAT at the standard rate.
There is no provision in the EU VAT Directive that would make it possible to exempt from VAT or apply a zero rate to the supply of defibrillators. Under the VAT (Refund of Tax) (No.15) Order, 1981 it is possible for individuals to obtain repayment of VAT expended on certain goods and appliances which assist persons with a disability to overcome that disability. In this context, a defibrillator purchased by or on behalf of an individual may qualify for a VAT refund.
62. Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor asked the Minister for Finance if income tax relief is set to be changed or stopped for residential homeowners who rent a room; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20951/15]
View answerSection 216A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides for the rent-a-room scheme. This scheme was introduced in Finance Act 2001 as an incentive to encourage individuals to let rooms in their principal private residence in order to bring about an increase in the availability of rental accommodation, particularly for the student sector.
The scheme provides an exemption from Income Tax, PRSI and USC on rent received where a person rents out a room or rooms in his or her principal private residence and the rent received does not exceed €12,000 per year. This was increased from €10,000 in Budget 2015.
In order to qualify for the exemption, it is necessary for the residential premises to be situated in the State and occupied by the individual as his or her sole or main residence during the tax year.
The relief only applies to individuals. It does not apply to companies or partnerships. In addition, an individual cannot avail of the relief in respect of payments for accommodation in the family home by a child of the individual. There is no restriction where rent is paid by other family members, for example, nieces or nephews.
The rent-a-room relief will, like all other reliefs, be kept under review, particularly in the context of preparations for Budget 2016 and the consequent Finance Bill.
63. Deputy Jerry Buttimer asked the Minister for Finance the way the universal social charge is applied to employee share ownership schemes; if private and semi-State companies are treated differently in applying the charge to such schemes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20987/15]
View answerThe legislation governing an Employee Share Ownership Trust (ESOT) is contained in Section 519 and Schedule 12 to the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. A company must apply to the Revenue Commissioners if they wish to operate such an ESOT. The Revenue Commissioners will only approve the ESOT where all the necessary conditions specified in the legislation are complied with.
All the ESOTs approved by the Revenue Commissioners to date work in conjunction with an Approved Profit Sharing Scheme (APSS) under which eligible employees may receive shares free of income tax. The legislation governing approved profit sharing schemes is contained in Chapter 1 of Part 17 and Schedule 11 to the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. As in the case of an ESOT, the Revenue Commissioners will only approve an APSS where all the necessary conditions specified in the legislation are complied with.
Universal Social Charge (USC) was introduced with effect from 1 January 2011 and is charged at the time shares are appropriated (or allocated) to eligible employees, i.e. the date they are transferred into the APSS either directly by the company or from the ESOT.
However, where the shares had already been held in a Revenue approved ESOT prior to 1 January 2011, their subsequent appropriation through the APSS to eligible employees does not attract a USC charge.
The treatment of the USC charge applies equally in the case of private and semi-State companies.
64. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Finance if he will address a matter (details supplied) regarding mortgages; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20990/15]
View answerCentral Bank regulated lending institutions, including those in which the State has a significant shareholding, are independent commercial entities. Therefore, subject to overall compliance with Central Bank prudential and consumer protection regulatory requirements, decisions on individual credit applications are a matter for an individual institution. As Minister for Finance, I have no role in such day to day decision making of regulated financial services providers.
On a general level, mortgage lending decisions must be undertaken on a sustainable and prudential basis by financial institutions and must also conform with relevant regulatory requirements, both in relation to the financial institution itself and also in the best interest of the customer. In this regard, I have been informed by the Central Bank that prior to offering a product or service a bank must gather and record sufficient information from the consumer appropriate to the nature and complexity of the product or service and must carry out an assessment of affordability to ascertain the personal consumer's likely ability to repay the debt over the duration of the agreement, in accordance with the requirements of the Consumer Protection Code 2012. In the case of all mortgage products provided to personal consumers, the assessment must include consideration of the results of a test on the personal consumer's ability to repay the instalments, over the duration of the agreement, on the basis of a 2% interest rate increase, at a minimum, above the interest rate offered to the personal consumer. This test does not apply to mortgages where the interest rate is fixed for a period of five years or more.
The Deputy will also be aware, the Central Bank of Ireland has put in place new macro prudential regulations for residential mortgage lending. These regulations provide that, in respect of mortgage for a principal dwelling, first time buyers will be subject to a maximum mortgage LTV of 90% for a property valued up to €220,000, and subject to an 80% LTV on any excess value above that amount. For non-first time buyers, a mortgage will be limited to 80% of the value of a principal dwelling house. In addition, there is a loan to income limit of 3.5 times gross annual income. However, these macro prudential regulations also allow a certain flexibility and lenders can exceed these limits when assessing individual cases. However, the final decision on whether or not to grant a mortgage, or the amount of credit that should be provided in an individual case, remains a commercial matter for an individual lender having regard to its commercial position and other relevant factors.
65. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of staff employed in the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service at the end of December 2012, December 2013, December 2014, and currently; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20940/15]
View answer66. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the annual cost of the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service in each year from 2012 to 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20941/15]
View answer67. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will provide a list of the projects and proposals on which the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service has provided advice and analysis to Government Departments and agencies, in each year from 2012 to 2014 and in 2015 to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20942/15]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 65 to 67, inclusive, together.
I refer the Deputy, in the first instance, to a recently published report on the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service (IGEES), which is available on my Department's website and on the IGEES web site http://igees.gov.ie. This report, which covers the period 2012 to 2014, will provide the Deputy with information on how the Service is being developed. The report explains the corporate oversight and management structures, the approach to resourcing and the strategic objectives of the new service.
The IGEES model involves units embedded in each Government department, and each Department meets the costs of the unit from within its existing resources. The costs are almost entirely related to pay - for existing qualified economic staff who have been reassigned to IGEES units and for newly recruited graduate staff - and it forms part of each Department's overall pay allocation as presented in the Revised Estimates Volume. Building up the expert capacity to staff IGEES units has involved Departments prioritising IGEES resourcing and assigning existing funding to meet the cost of bringing in newly skilled graduates. There is no separate, annual budget for IGEES. There has been a considerable build up of staffing in the IGEES units across Government departments in the period 2012 to 2014, combining new recruitment with existing expert staff, increasing from just over 30 in 2012, to over 50 in 2013 and around 70 in 2014. The Service is still in expansion mode, with new units in the course of being established in a number Departments, and with new staff being assigned to existing units.
Regarding outputs from IGEES, the staff assigned across Government departments contribute to policy-making in their parent Departments across a wide range of areas, including in economic analysis and forecasting, VfM and expenditure reviews, tax and expenditure policy, climate change, transport economics, agriculture economics and cost-benefit analysis. The IGEES website (http://igees.gov.ie/) presents a range of analytical and statistical outputs from the service.
68. Deputy Michael McCarthy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will provide an update with regard to planned flood relief schemes (details supplied) in County Cork; the commencement and completion dates for each scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20952/15]
View answerThe Bandon Flood Relief Scheme is currently at tender stage for procurement of a civil works contractor. The pre-qualification process to provide a shortlist of contractors is completed and tender documents are currently being finalised and are expected to be issued very shortly by the Office of Public Works (OPW) to the applicants who were selected to tender for the project.
The Skibbereen Flood Relief Scheme is being progressed by Cork County Council as the Contracting Authority for the project, with funding being provided by the OPW. The current position is that tenders have been received and are currently being examined by the Council.
Both the Skibbereen and Bandon Schemes will shortly be submitted to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform for Confirmation i.e. statutory approval under the Arterial Drainage Acts. This process includes an independent review of the Environmental Impact Statement for each Scheme. It is hoped that this process will be completed on both Schemes in time to allow Contractors to be appointed in the Autumn of this year. Once a contractor is appointed and construction gets underway, it is expected that it will take approximately two years to complete each Scheme.
In relation to the Clonakilty Flood Relief Scheme, a preferred scheme design option was presented at a statutory Public Exhibition which took place from 15th December 2014 to 20th January 2015. Members of the Public were invited to submit observations on the preferred option by 20th February 2015. All the observations received from concerned parties are currently being considered and will be taken on board as far as possible.
Provided there is broad acceptance of the Clonakilty Scheme proposals by the public, detailed design of the Scheme will be undertaken. This will be followed by procurement of a civil works contractor and seeking Confirmation of the Scheme. Subject to successful completion of the tender and Confirmation processes, it is hoped that construction will start in early 2016. The construction programme is expected to take up to 24 months to complete.
The Government remains fully committed to the provision of flood relief schemes for the people of Bandon, Skibbereen and Clonakilty and the OPW has made provision for the cost of implementing these schemes in its financial profiles over the years 2015-2018.
69. Deputy John Halligan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his plans to extend the remit of the Ombudsman to investigate complaints regarding private nursing homes; when it is anticipated the changes in remit will come into effect; if the remit to investigate complaints will extend to retrospective complaints; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20974/15]
View answerIn accordance with the Ombudsman (Amendment) Act 2012, it is my intention to extend, by Ministerial Order, the Ombudsman's remit to private nursing homes whose residents are in receipt of state support or subvention. By extending the Ombudsman's remit, greater accountability and assurance will be afforded to patients of these nursing homes and to their families.
The State, through the Nursing Homes Support Scheme, provides financial assistance for those who require long-term nursing home care, with residents contributing a portion of the cost in accordance with their means. In doing so, it funds 22,142 nursing home residents as of end March 2015. This represents residents in public, voluntary and private long-term residential care receiving financial support.
As prescribed by the Ombudsman (Amendment) Act 2012, I am undertaking a consultation process on the draft Ministerial Order extending the Ombudsman's remit. This includes the Ombudsman, the Ombudsman for Children, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions, the Health Service Executive, the Health Information and Quality Authority, and Nursing Homes Ireland. Following this consultation process, I expect the Order will be in place by end June. It is not intended that the Order would operate retrospectively.
70. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation his views on the long delays in the delivery of Labour Court adjudications; the reason for these delays; and his plans to resolve the issue. [20966/15]
View answerThe Labour Court’s statutory mandate is to provide a fair, independent and cost effective means of resolving workplace related disputes.
The Labour Court is committed to providing a hearing date without undue delay and that it will deliver a decision or recommendation within a reasonable timeframe following the hearing. On average the Labour Court can provide a hearing date within 13 weeks of referral and deliver a recommendation within three weeks from the date of hearing in industrial relations cases and a determination within six weeks of hearing in employment rights and equality cases. The Court meets that target in 80% of cases. Delays in issuing recommendations/determinations, where they occur, are frequently caused by a failure on the part of parties to provide the Court with all of the information that it requires in order to fairly dispose of a case.
I am advised that the Labour Court is not currently experiencing long delays in issuing its recommendations/determinations.
As part of the reform programme underway to deliver a two tier Workplace Relations structure, the appellate functions of the Employment Appeals Tribunal will be incorporated into an expanded Labour Court. The Labour Court currently has three Divisions. A new Division of the Labour Court is to be established. The Public Appointments Service have finalised the selection process for two new Deputy Chairs of the Labour Court, and following consultation with employer representative groups and trade unions, the Minister will select two additional Ordinary Members. This will facilitate the appointment of an additional Division to the Labour Court. While the Labour Court will have four Divisions, it will be restructured for greater efficiency to allow the Court deal with additional appeals.
I am confident that these changes will further enhance the efficiency and productivity of the Court and will allow it to cope with an increased caseload without a corresponding increase in its strength.
