Written Answers Nos. 95-109
95. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance if he has ceased appointing new public interest directors to the banks; the reform of the procedures for the appointment of bank directors by the State that are currently being considered; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34105/16]
View answerIn the Programme for a Partnership Government ('PPG') the Government has committed to, "Cease to appoint new Public Interest Directors to the banks, and reform the procedures for the appointment of bank directors by the State, with a view to increasing transparency in the process". As such I do not expect to make any new appointments of Public Interest Directors to the boards of the banks.
As the Deputy will be aware the rights for the State to appoint public interest directors to the boards of the covered institutions were derived from the terms of the guarantee schemes introduced in 2008 and last for the period of the guarantee. With the last of the guaranteed liabilities due to mature in the coming years, I believe that now is an appropriate time to review the appointment of any Government nominees to the boards of the banks and propose further open procedures for any future appointments to those boards.
Officials in my Department are continuing to review options in relation to the appointment procedures for bank directors having due regard to the distinct differences which exist from appointments to other State boards, not least the requirements of the Central Bank/Single Supervisory Mechanism Fitness and Probity Regime and the requirement to have a broad set of expertise relevant to large regulated entities in an ever more complex regulatory environment.
96. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance his plans to increase enforcement and sanctions for fuel laundering in view of the programme for Government commitment and the estimates in the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly report on cross-Border crime of the loss to the Eexchequer by fuel fraud to be in the range of €140 to €260 million per year; if he has met his Northern Irish counterpart on this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34106/16]
View answerI am advised by Revenue, who are responsible for combating fiscal fraud, that action against fuel laundering and related forms of criminal activity is a central element of their work.
I am advised also that it is inherently difficult to estimate with confidence the extent of any illegal activity and that it is not possible, therefore, to put a figure on the cost to the Exchequer of fuel fraud. Nevertheless, the serious threat that criminal activity of this kind poses to legitimate and compliant businesses, consumers and the Exchequer is recognised, and action against it has accordingly been a priority for Revenue over recent years.
Revenue has implemented a comprehensive strategy to tackle the illegal fuel trade, including the introduction of stringent new supply chain controls underpinning a rigorous programme of enforcement action and supported by a range of new legislative measures that I brought forward in Finance Bills. In addition, Revenue and HM Revenue and Customs in the United Kingdom undertook a joint initiative to find a new fiscal marker for use in marked fuels, which was introduced in Ireland and the United Kingdom from the beginning of April 2015.
In addition, Revenue works closely with An Garda Síochána in acting against fuel fraud, and the relevant authorities in the State also work closely with their counterparts in Northern Ireland, through cross-border enforcement groups, to target the organised crime groups that are responsible for a large proportion of this criminal activity. I believe that this work is being supported and facilitated by the setting up earlier this year, in the framework of "A Fresh Start: the Stormont Agreement and Implementation Plan", of the Joint Agency Task Force, which includes Revenue. I understand that strategic and tactical plans have been agreed by all stakeholders to ensure that the activities of the agencies concerned are targeted as effectively as possible against those responsible for this form of criminality.
Revenue works in close cooperation also with the relevant authorities in other jurisdictions, the European Anti-Fraud Office and other international bodies and agencies in the ongoing programmes of action at international level to combat the illicit fuel trade.
An analysis of the oil market undertaken by Revenue in 2015 indicates that the wide-ranging programmes of action taken against fuel fraud have had a significant impact on illegal activity. This is borne out by feedback from fuel traders and their representative bodies, who report a significant reduction in the incidence of laundered fuel. In addition, Revenue carried out an extensive random sampling programme early in 2016 which tested for the presence of the new fuel marker in the storage tanks of forecourt fuel retailers. No samples tested positive for the new fuel marker.
The penalties for offences relating to fuel smuggling and laundering are laid down in section 119 of the Finance Act 2001 and section 102 of the Finance Act 1999. On conviction following summary prosecution under these provisions, a court may impose a fine of €5,000, or a term of imprisonment not exceeding 12 months, or both. Where a person is convicted for an indictable offence, the court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding 5 years, or a fine not exceeding €126,970, or both. In addition, for an indictable offence under section 119 of the Finance Act 2001, if the value of the smuggled fuel concerned exceeds €250,000, including duty and taxes, the court may impose a penalty of three times the value of the fuel, or a term of imprisonment not exceeding 5 years, or both. The penalties were increased in the Finance Act 2010 to an amount significantly higher than that which had applied previously. For example, the fine on conviction for an indictable offence was increased from €12,695 to an amount not exceeding €126,970.
The courts decide on the level of fine to be applied in any particular case and, in practice, they do not apply fines up to the existing limits. There are no proposals at present to increase the level of fines available to the courts. However, the position is kept under review, taking account, among other considerations, of the practical experience of the fines imposed under the current provisions.
I am satisfied that Revenue's work against fuel laundering has achieved a considerable level of success, and I am assured that action against fuel fraud will continue to be a high priority.
97. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance when he envisages a new tax on sugar drinks will be introduced; the estimated annual yield from such a tax; the rate at which he considers the new tax should be set and the types of drinks included within its scope; the preparation currently being undertaken by his Department in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34107/16]
View answerThe Programme for a Partnership Government commits to the introduction of a tax on sugar-sweetened drinks (SSDs). The tax will contribute towards important public health goals, as well providing a new source of revenue for public spending. The Department of Health has also supported the introduction of a tax on SSDs in order to reduce added-sugar in diets, particularly the diets of children and young people. The proposed tax on SSDs is seen as just one measure in the Department of Health's comprehensive plan to tackle obesity in Ireland.
Sugar-sweetened drinks taxes have been introduced in a number of European countries in recent years. The UK is due to introduce a soft-drinks industry levy from April 2018. On Budget day I said that given the highly integrated production and supply chains which exist in the soft drinks industry between Ireland and the United Kingdom, it would be prudent to align the Irish sugar-sweetened drinks tax with the UK's tax proposal, in terms of timeframe and structure. I also launched a public consultation process on Budget day to get the views of all stakeholders in order to ensure that, when introduced, the tax is as effective as possible, as fair as possible, and minimises the administrative burden on business. That public consultation process is currently underway and will be open to submissions until 3 January 2017.
The estimated yield from the tax on SSDs will depend on the eventual design. The General Excises Tax Strategy Group (TSG) paper 2016 examines options around an SSD tax and potential estimated yields. Both the General Excises TSG paper and the Public Consultation paper are available on my Department's website.
98. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance his views on the recent comments by the Governor of the Central Bank (details supplied) that technological innovation may alter the role of central banks in managing the money supply and acting as a lender of last resort in the context of widespread adoption of private sector digital currencies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34108/16]
View answerThe Governor of the Central Bank made remarks back in June on the topic of technological innovation and financial services. I think it is important to be clear on what the Governor said. He said that in addition to the four primary challenges he identified in the regulatory treatment of financial innovations, technological innovation may also alter the role of central banks in managing the money supply and acting as a lender of last resort.
He instanced the growth in electronic forms of payment and said that at one level this growth looks set to reduce the traditional role of notes and coins in the monetary system. He noted that this may have implications for the role of central banks generally in managing the money supply. He also said that, at another level, there is much discussion on the relative merits of more widespread adoption of private-sector digital currencies versus a new role for central banks in the direct issuance and management of publicly-backed digital currencies.
If, in time, there is to be a new role of this kind for central banks in the Euro area, it would have to be agreed at a European level. The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of the European Parliament published a report on virtual currencies in May 2016 which called for the creation of a horizontal taskforce on distributed ledger technology to be set up under the leadership of the European Commission. The Deputy is likely to be aware that the European Commission has published proposals to amend the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive including provisions on virtual currencies and negotiations on these proposals are ongoing.
99. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance if he has reviewed the most recent quarterly bank watch study from ISME on the ability of small and medium firms to get loan approval and access to credit; his views on the refusal rate of 35% for requests for credit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34109/16]
View answerIn terms of credit availability to SMEs from the banking sector, I would draw the Deputy's attention to the most recent Department of Finance Credit Demand Survey which covers the period October 2015 to March 2016. This survey series seeks information from a significant sample of Irish SMEs from all sectors and regions of the country. A total of 1,500 telephone interviews were conducted with a random sample of Irish micro, small and medium SMEs. The survey shows that, when pending applications are excluded, 80% of credit applications to banks were approved or partially approved.
The Central Bank of Ireland's SME Market Report for the first half of this year also shows that rejection rates, for credit applications by SMEs, continues to decline and that they are now in line with the euro area average.
SMEs who have had an application for credit of up to €3 million declined or reduced by the main banks can seek support from the Credit Review Office (CRO). This is a Government initiative which provides independent reviews of credit decisions at the request of SMEs. It is a strictly confidential process between the business, the CRO and the bank. The CRO overturns more than 50% of appeals it receives.
I can assure the Deputy that my Department and the CRO, working with other relevant Departments and Agencies, will continue to monitor the availability of both bank and non-bank credit so as to ensure that Irish SMEs have sufficient access to finance.
100. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of companies that have availed of the knowledge development box since its introduction; if he will provide a breakdown of the companies by size, that is, micro, small and medium enterprises (SME) or large companies; his plans to assess the impact of the knowledge development box; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34121/16]
View answerThe Knowledge Development Box (KDB) was introduced in Finance Act 2015 and applies from 1 January 2016. At this time it is not possible to provide a breakdown of the uptake of the measure as the data is not yet available. The Corporation Tax returns that relate to the activity in 2016 will not be filed until November 2017.
It is expected that because of the operation of the formula set out by the OECD "modified nexus", the KDB will be of most benefit to single companies who carry out their R&D activities solely in Ireland, or in the EU/EEA via a branch. Therefore, even though the KDB is a general measure open to all corporate taxpayers, it is anticipated in the early years that it will be of most use to small innovative Irish businesses.
In line with the Government commitment in the Medium Term Economic Statement and the Department of Finance Tax Expenditure Guidelines, the KDB legislation includes a review clause to ensure that an evaluation is carried out to assess the KDB and ensure that it provides value for money for the Irish taxpayer.
The approach to such an evaluation is noted in the 2015 Report on Tax Expenditures which is published on the Department's website at the following link (see page 73):http://budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2016/Documents/Tax_Expenditures_Report_pub.pdf.
To ensure that the evaluation of the KDB is carried out in advance of Finance Bill 2020, it is anticipated that this review would be complete by Q2 2020. By this time the CT returns will have been filed by KDB claimants for the period 2016 to 2018, and the relevant data from these returns may be examined to provide a breakdown of the number and size of companies availing of the KDB.
101. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the total cost in tax foregone to date or the anticipated cost for 2016 of the knowledge development box. [34122/16]
View answerIt is not possible to provide the total cost of the scheme for 2016 as this data is not yet available. Corporation Tax returns for 2016 returns will not be filed until November 2017.
As set out it Budget 2016, it is estimated that the KDB will cost €31m in 2016 and €50m over a full year thereafter. The basis for this calculation was explained in the Tax Expenditures Report 2015 on page 65. This is available at the following link: http://www.budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2016/Documents/Tax_Expenditures_Report_pub.pdf.
102. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the portion of the recent increase in corporation tax receipts attributed to each of the factors, currency fluctuations, one-off payments, improved trading conditions and timing factors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34123/16]
View answerIt is assumed that the Question is referring to the increase in Corporation Tax receipts in 2015 of €2.3 billion over 2014 receipts and the €820 million surplus in receipts this year to-date.
Information in respect of the reasons underpinning variations in Corporation Tax receipts is generally only available from analysing the annual Corporation Tax returns. Returns for 2015 are currently being filed, the data will be processed and available for analysis in early 2017. Returns for 2016 will be filed this time next year.
Notwithstanding the lack of returns information, Revenue published a detailed analysis of trends in receipts in 2014 and 2015 earlier this year, available at: http://www.revenue.ie/en/about/publications/corporation-tax-receipts-2014-2015.pdf. Revenue has committed to updating this analysis early next year to include trends in 2016 receipts and an analysis of factors underlying 2015 growth in receipts based on the returns data.
I am advised by Revenue that the analysis of 2015 tax receipts, along with information from Revenue's Large Cases Division, indicates that about half of the increase was from a small number of large multinationals and is attributable to a variety of reasons including improved trading conditions, positive currency fluctuations, some timing factors and a number of one-off payments. However, the Deputy may wish to note, that certain information outlined in his request such as currency fluctuations is not captured on the returns and will not be separately identifiable from other reasons associated with profit growth underpinning the increase in tax.
Based on macroeconomic forecasts, and information from Revenue indicating that the majority of the increased receipts are not based on once-off factors (and so likely to recur), my Department forecasts receipts of Corporation Tax of €7.5 billion in 2016 and €7.7 billion in 2017.
103. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of times the IFSC funds working group has met in 2016; the agenda points for each meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34124/16]
View answerWhile I am not responsible for the IFSC funds working group or have any involvement in the setting of any of the agendas, officials from my Department attend its meetings. I understand that the group has met 10 times in 2016; the agendas for each of those meetings are set out below.
|
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Thursday 21st January 2016 at 11:00amBoardroom, IDA, Wilton Park House, Wilton Place, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 16 December 2015 and matters arising3. Communications – Consistent and effective messaging4. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AML5. AIFMD6. Audit Directive/RegulationNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Client Assets/Fund Assets3. Loan originating QIAIF4. ICAV outstanding matters5. Central Bank themed inspections for 2016C. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20152. BEPS3. European FTT4. Common Reporting Standard5. CCF Transparency (for Japanese market)D. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects5. AOB |
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Thursday 18th February 2016 at 11:00amBoardroom, IDA, Wilton Park House, Wilton Place, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 21st January 2016 and matters arising3. Skills and Education 4. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AML5. AIFMD6. Audit Directive/RegulationNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Client Assets/Fund Assets3. Loan originating QIAIF4. ICAV outstanding mattersC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20152. BEPS3. European FTT4. Common Reporting Standard5. CCF Transparency (for Japanese market)D. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects5. AOB |
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Thursday 24th March 2016 at 11:00amWilton Theatre Room, IDA, Wilton Park House, Wilton Place, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 18th February 2016 and matters arising3. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AML5. AIFMD6. Audit Directive/RegulationNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Client Assets/Fund Assets3. Loan originating QIAIF4. ICAV outstanding mattersC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20152. BEPS3. European FTT4. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects4. AOB |
|
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Thursday 14th April 2016 at 11:00amJP Morgan Bank, JPMorgan House, IFSC, Dublin 11. Apologies2. Minutes of 24th March 2016 and matters arising3. Core Agenda itemsDiscussion: European Long Term Investment FundsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AML5. AIFMD6. Audit Directive/RegulationNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Client Assets/Fund Assets3. Loan originating QIAIF4. ICAV outstanding mattersC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20152. BEPS3. European FTT4. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects4. AOB |
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Monday 23rd May 2016 at 11:00amIDA, Wilton Theatre Room, Wilton Park House, Wilton Place, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 14th April 2016 and matters arising3. Core Agenda itemsAn Update on preparations for the FATF Mutual EvaluationA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AIFMD5. Audit Directive/RegulationNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Client Assets/Fund Assets3. Loan originating QIAIF4. ICAV outstanding matters5. ELTIFC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20152. BEPS3. European FTT4. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects4. AOB |
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Monday 20th June 2016 at 11:00amIDA, Wilton Theatre Room, Wilton Park House, Wilton Place, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 23rd May 2016 and matters arising3. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AIFMD5. Audit Directive/RegulationNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Client Assets/Fund Assets3. Loan originating QIAIF4. ICAV outstanding matters5. ELTIFC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20152. BEPS3. European FTT4. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects4. AOB |
|
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Thursday 14th July 2016 at 10:00amNational Emergency Co-Ordination CentreAgriculture House, Kildare Street, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 20th June 2016 and matters arising3. Brexit4. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AIFMDNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Client Assets/Fund Assets3. Loan originating QIAIF4. ICAV outstanding matters5. ELTIFC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20162. CCF – Japanese treaty access3. BEPS4. European FTT5. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects5. AOB |
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Thursday 18th August 2016 at 11:00amWilton Theatre Room, IDA, Wilton Park House, Wilton Place, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 14th July 2016 and matters arising3. Anti Money Laundering Update from D/Finance4. Brexit5. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AIFMDNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Loan originating QIAIF3. ICAV outstanding matters4. ELTIF5. CP 105 Amendments to UCITS Regulations Consultation Paper6. CP 97 – Investment Firm Regulations -Outsourcing7. Companies Acts 2014i. Directors Compliance Statementsii. Audit Committeesiii. Redomiciling8. Accounting BillC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20162. CCF – Japanese treaty access3. BEPS4. European FTT5. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects6. AOB |
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Wednesday 28th September 2016 at 11:30amJ.P. Morgan House, 1 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin 11. Apologies2. Minutes of 18th August 2016 and matters arising3. Brexit4. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AIFMDNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Loan originating QIAIF3. ICAV outstanding matters4. ELTIF5. CP 97 – Investment Firm Regulations -Outsourcing6. Companies Acts 2014i. Directors Compliance Statementsii. Audit Committeesiii. Redomiciling7. Accounting BillC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20162. CCF – Japanese treaty access3. BEPS4. European FTT5. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects5. AOB |
|
AgendaIFSC Funds Working Group Friday, 21th October 2016 at 10:00amWilton Theatre Room, IDA, Wilton Park House, Wilton Place, Dublin 21. Apologies2. Minutes of 28th September 2016 and matters arising3. Brexit4. Core Agenda itemsA. European Regulatory Developments1. Capital Markets Union2. Money Market Funds3. UCITS V4. AIFMDNew Markets1. Strategy for developing the Chinese Marketi. RQFII Quotaii. MOU with CBRCB. Domestic Regulatory Developments1. Fund Management Company Effectiveness2. Loan originating QIAIF3. ELTIF4. ILP/ICAV5. CP 97 – Investment Firm Regulations -Outsourcing6. Companies Acts 2014i. Directors Compliance Statementsii. Audit Committeesiii. Redomiciling7. Accounting BillC. Taxation Matters1. Finance Bill 20162. Irish/US Tax Treaty3. CCF – Japanese treaty access4. BEPS5. European FTT6. Common Reporting StandardD. Standing ItemsMarketing Events1. Planned industry events2. Planned Government events3. IFS2020 projects5. AOB |
104. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of countries, with which the State has a double taxation agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34125/16]
View answerTo date, Ireland has signed a total of 72 agreements for the avoidance of double taxation with respect to taxes on income. The countries are listed in the following table. In addition, the State has two agreements with the United States and with the United Kingdom dealing with the avoidance of double taxation on gifts and inheritances.
DTAs signed by Ireland as at 7 November 2016 (72):
|
Countries |
Countries |
Countries |
Countries |
|
Albania |
Estonia |
Luxembourg |
Saudi Arabia |
|
Armenia |
Ethiopia |
Macedonia |
Serbia |
|
Australia |
Finland |
Malaysia |
Singapore |
|
Austria |
France |
Malta |
Slovak Republic |
|
Bahrain |
Georgia |
Mexico |
Slovenia |
|
Belarus |
Germany |
Moldova |
South Africa |
|
Belgium |
Greece |
Montenegro |
Spain |
|
Bosnia & Herzegovina |
Hong Kong |
Morocco |
Sweden |
|
Botswana |
Hungary |
Netherlands |
Switzerland |
|
Bulgaria |
Iceland |
New Zealand |
Thailand |
|
Canada |
India |
Norway |
Turkey |
|
Chile |
Israel |
Pakistan |
Ukraine |
|
China |
Italy |
Panama |
United Arab Emirates |
|
Croatia |
Japan |
Poland |
United Kingdom |
|
Cyprus |
Korea |
Portugal |
United States |
|
Czech Republic |
Kuwait |
Qatar |
Uzbekistan |
|
Denmark |
Latvia |
Romania |
Vietnam |
|
Egypt |
Lithuania |
Russia |
Zambia |
105. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the steps he has taken to implement the action points recommended by the OECD under the BEPS initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34126/16]
View answerIreland has been a keen supporter of the OECD BEPS process and has been actively engaged in the implementation of the BEPS recommendations since the reports were published in October 2015. I recently published an Update on Ireland's International Tax Strategy which sets out what we have done and what we plan to do regarding the implementation of the OECD BEPS recommendations. In respect of the 15 BEPS reports:
- BEPS Actions 2, 3 and 4 put forward recommendations that have been legislated for in the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive. The Directive will therefore see three of the key OECD BEPS recommendations implemented consistently across Europe. These are rules targeting hybrid mismatches, interest deductibility rules and Controlled Foreign Company rules. Ireland will implement these changes in line with agreed deadlines set out in the Directive.
- Action 5 developed the modified nexus approach for IP regimes. Ireland's Knowledge Development Box was introduced in line with this approach. The Knowledge Development Box was reviewed by the OECD's Forum on Harmful Tax Practice and was declared to be the first such incentive to be fully compliant with the modified nexus rules agreed in BEPS Action 5.
- Action 5 also makes recommendations on exchange of information. Ireland is implementing the exchange of information requirements fully in respect of tax rulings set out in this report.
- Actions 6, 7 and 14 make a series of recommendations for updating tax treaties to prevent tax treaty shopping and improve dispute resolution. The BEPS multilateral instrument (MLI) will ensure that tax treaties are updated to reflect these BEPS recommendations. The MLI is close to being agreed at the OECD. Ireland has played an active part in this work.
- Actions 8 to 10 provide recommendations on transfer pricing. In May this year, new transfer pricing rules were agreed at the OECD. As set out in the recent update on Ireland's international tax strategy we are now considering what changes are required to ensure that Ireland's transfer pricing rules meet the standards set in the OECD transfer pricing guidelines.
- Action 12 recommends the introduction of mandatory disclosure rules for promoters of tax schemes. Ireland is one of the few countries to already have mandatory disclosure rules in our domestic legislation.
- Action 13 recommends countries introduce country-by-country reporting. Ireland legislated for country-by-country reporting in the Finance Act 2015 and signed a Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement in January 2016 to share these reports with other tax authorities.
- The remaining BEPS reports, Actions 1, 11 and 15, do not make any specific recommendations. Further work continues on the areas examined by these reports in various OECD working parties and Ireland is actively engaging in this work.
Ireland will continue to take actions needed to implement the BEPS reports. The review of Ireland's corporation tax code, which has been launched with Budget 2017, will include consideration of what further actions Ireland may need to take to ensure we are fully compliant with the OECD BEPS recommendations.
106. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the status of the State's implementation of the anti-tax avoidance directive; the legislative or regulatory steps he plans to take to complete its implementation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34127/16]
View answerThe Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive was agreed by Member States following ECOFIN on 17 June 2016. The Directive includes five significant corporate tax anti-avoidance measures. Three of the measures derive from the non-binding elements of the OECD BEPS process, with the remaining two measures coming from the European Commission's previous Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) Directive.
With regard to the measures that are derived from the non-binding elements of the BEPS process, namely the controlled foreign company rules, the hybrid mismatch rules and the interest limitation rules, these measures must be implemented by Member States by 1 January 2019. However, the provisions on interest deductions (the interest limitation rule) may be deferred until 2024 for countries that already have strong targeted interest rules.
The Directive also proposes that an exit tax must be applied when a company moves its residence, its assets or a branch out of a Member State. Ireland currently has an exit tax which will be reviewed to determine what changes may be needed to ensure it is in line with the Directive. The exit tax will need to be implemented by 1 January 2020.
Finally, the Directive also proposes that Member States introduce a general anti-avoidance rule which disregards any non-genuine arrangements which are carried out by a company for the purpose of gaining a tax advantage. Ireland in fact already has a similar General Anti-Avoidance Rule in our domestic tax law since the 1980s. The general anti-abuse rule in the Directive will need to be implemented by 1 January 2019.
The measures in the Directive will be implemented by Ireland to meet the agreed deadlines.
107. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide a list of all the tax expenditures that currently exist; the estimated annual cost and taxation forgone in respect of these expenditures; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34140/16]
View answerEach year at Budget time, for the last two years, my Department has published (on its website) its Report on Tax Expenditures.
The second such report was published on 13 October 2016, and can be found at http://www.budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2017/Documents/Tax_Expenditures_Report%202016_final.pdf.
The information sought is contained in pages 103-123 of the Report.
108. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide, in respect of tax settlements published for each of the years 2013 to date in 2016, the number of tax settlements published in each period and the overall amount of tax settlements published; the number and value of tax settlements that were paid in full at the time of publication; the number and amount of settlements that had a payment plan in place at the time of publication; the number and value of tax settlements for which no payment had been made or payment arrangement was in place at the time of publication; the total number and the value of payments received to date paid in respect of these settlements; the total number and value of the settlements published that have not been paid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34144/16]
View answerIn accordance with section 1086 Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, the Revenue Commissioners are obliged to publish a List of Tax Defaulters every quarter with details of those taxpayers with whom they have reached a settlement that has met certain specific criteria. The legislation provides for the publication of tax defaulters, whether they have paid the settlement amount or not. In addition, the Commissioners are also obliged to publish details of taxpayers where a Penalty Determination has been made by a relevant Court.
The following table, provided to me by Revenue, sets out the settlement details requested by the Deputy. Some cases may involve a number of different elements, for example, a phased payment for some of the settlement and a determination of inability to pay in respect of the remainder of the settlement. For that reason it is not possible to provide specific numbers in relation to every category shown, without introducing an element of double-counting. However, the overall number of cases is shown for settlements and those paid in full.
As regards settlements where inability to pay is determined for some or all of the amount concerned, as part of Revenue's standard procedures, these determinations are revisited if there is a subsequent material change in the defaulter's circumstances which would suggest ability to pay some, all or the remainder of the settlement amount.
|
Published Settlements |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 - (Quarters 1&2) |
|
Value and number of settlements |
€83.1m - 435 |
€92.8m - 414 |
€68.2m - 365 |
€41.1m - 189 |
|
Value and number of settlements paid in full |
€24m - 138 cases |
€33.5m - 125 cases |
€16.1m - 127 cases |
€20.3m - 71 cases |
|
Value of settlements part paid/being paid by phased payment agreement |
€16.7m |
€17.9m |
€16m |
€6.9m |
|
Value of settlements subject to collection/recovery enforcement proceedings |
€20m |
€19.3m |
€16.7m |
€7m |
|
Value of settlements where Inability to pay determined |
€22.4m |
€22.1m |
€19.4m |
€6.9m |
I am advised by Revenue that the number of penalty determinations made for the relevant years, and published in the Lists of Defaulters, is included below.
|
Penalty Determinations made by the Courts |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 - (Quarters 1&2) |
|
|
€1.4m - (15 cases) |
€5.1m - (22 cases) |
€2.3m - (20 cases) |
€1m - (12 cases) |
109. Deputy John Brassil asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 169 of 3 November 2016, if he will clarify the policy regarding private car rental companies which operate here; if these companies are required to use cars taxed and registered here or if they can use vehicles taxed and registered in Northern Ireland and England; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34149/16]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that a car hire company operating in the State is obliged to use cars that are registered in the State.
A car rental that is registered in another jurisdiction and is brought into the State by a non-State resident can be either brought out of the State by that person or can be left in the State where it can (1) be re-hired once to another non-State resident with a view to its being removed from the State or (2) be removed from the State by an employee of the car hire firm concerned, whether or not the employee is a State resident. Car hire firms established in the State may not provide foreign-registered car rentals to individuals resident in the State.
