Skip to main content
Normal View

Tuesday, 28 Jul 2020

Written Answers Nos. 235-254

Revenue Commissioners

Questions (235)

Catherine Murphy

Question:

235. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Finance the amount of cash seized by the dog detector unit of the Revenue Commissioners from 1 October 2019 to date in 2020; the estimated value of narcotics, prescription drugs and tobacco products detected by the unit over the same time period; if food substances have been seized over the same time period; if the Revenue Commissioners plan to expand the unit; if so, if a business case has been submitted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18666/20]

View answer

Written answers

I am advised by Revenue that it currently operates 19 Dog Detector Teams, which includes one team working on behalf of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. A further 7 posts, which are vacant due to staff movements, are in the process of being filled.

Statistics in relation to seizures by the Teams are compiled on an annual basis. The table below sets out the seizures secured in 2019. The information in the table excludes food seizures achieved by the team operating on behalf of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine as this information is reported separately by that Department.  

Year 2019

Type

Quantity

Value

Cannabis (Herbal & Resin)

329.8kg

€6,547,602

Cocaine & Heroin

1.14kg

€79,723

Amphetamine, Ecstasy & Other

182kg

€6,344,235

Cash

 

 

Euro

-

€318,980

Sterling

-

£44,000

US Dollars

-

$3,000

Tobacco & Cigarettes

 

 

Cigarettes/Cigars

6,520,638Kg

€3,611,570

Tobacco

471.37Kg

€256,205

 Revenue has confirmed to me that the current number of Dog Detector Teams meets its operational needs. However, the requirement is kept under review, having regard to ongoing risk assessment and evolving operational needs.

Value Added Tax

Questions (236)

Sorca Clarke

Question:

236. Deputy Sorca Clarke asked the Minister for Finance the justification for the 23% VAT on adult life jackets; if he will consider reducing same to zero; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18684/20]

View answer

Written answers

The VAT rating of goods and services is subject to the requirements of EU VAT law with which Irish VAT law must comply.  The VAT Directive does not make specific provision for a reduced or zero rate to apply to safety equipment, including life saving equipment, and as such they are subject to the standard VAT rate, which is currently 23%.  However, for historic reasons the zero rate of VAT applies to safety clothing, including lifejackets, for children up to 10 years of age, while the supply of such clothing for adults and children older than 10 years is liable to VAT at the 23% rate.  As Ireland applied the zero rate to clothing and protective clothing for children up to 10 years of age on 1 January 1991, we are entitled to retain that zero rated application.  However, as the standard VAT rate applied to safety equipment and safety clothing for adults and older children at 1 January 1991, it is not possible to apply a reduced or zero rate to them.

Ministerial Briefing

Questions (237)

Gerald Nash

Question:

237. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance if a copy of the briefing documents provided to him upon his appointment to his Department will be provided; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18722/20]

View answer

Written answers

I wish to advise the Deputy that a briefing document prepared by the Department of Finance was provided to me on my appointment as Minister for Finance. A copy of this document, having regard to the relevant provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2014, is available from my Department’s website at the following link:

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/d1da8-ministers-brief-june-2020/.

As such, the document will not be provided on an individual basis.

Covid-19 Pandemic Supports

Questions (238)

Gerald Nash

Question:

238. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance the number of employers using the temporary wage subsidy scheme entering €0.01 on the system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18723/20]

View answer

Written answers

I am advised by Revenue that over 63,000 employers have accessed the Temporary Wage Subsidy Scheme (TWSS) to date in respect of almost 627,000 employees. The numbers of employers availing of the scheme varies from week to week, depending on factors such as the pay frequencies that fall due, i.e. weekly, monthly, etc. For example, over 31,800 employers claimed the subsidy in respect of approximately 252,000 employees during the last week.

Where an employer chooses to make an additional payment (above the level of the TWSS subsidy) to an employee, the employer will return a gross pay amount of more than €0.01 on the payroll submission to Revenue. The €0.01 amount is only returned in situations where no additional payment is made.

Revenue has confirmed that in most weeks, approximately 90% of employee recipients, employed by some 80% of employers availing of the scheme, are in receipt of additional payments.

EU Issues

Questions (239)

Gerald Nash

Question:

239. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance his views on the proposed EU digital tax; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18724/20]

View answer

Written answers

I have consistently recognised that the international taxation system needs to adapt to account for changes in how business is conducted due to increased digitalisation in recent years. I strongly believe that the best way to achieve a sustainable solution is by securing global agreement.  The OECD BEPS Inclusive Framework is the forum in which can global agreement can best be achieved.

Unilateral digital services taxes, whether at national or regional level, only serve to increase international trade tensions and undermine the trust required to achieve a lasting global agreement. This is why Ireland was among a number of EU Member States which opposed an EU Digital Services Tax when it was first proposed in 2018. The European Commission withdrew its proposal in early 2019 and have committed to supporting the ongoing discussions at OECD. 

The OECD BEPS Inclusive Framework is due to publish an update on its ongoing work to address tax and digitalisation in October.  I am not aware of any plans to relaunch the EU Digital Services Tax proposal while discussions at the OECD BEPS Inclusive Framework remain underway.

Covid-19 Pandemic

Questions (240)

Gerald Nash

Question:

240. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance his views on the recent agreement regarding the European recovery fund; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18725/20]

View answer

Written answers

As the Deputy will be aware, on 21st July 2020, Heads of State and Government reached agreement on the Post-2020 MFF and Next Generation EU, totalling €1.82 trillion. Difficult discussions took place over four days but I welcome this agreement and think this is a fair and balanced outcome and demonstrates that Europe can work collectively to deal with this once-in-a-generation crisis. Council conclusions agreed to borrow €750 billion, supporting Member States with €390 billion in grants and €360 billion in loans. Agreement was also reached on a new Multiannual Financial Framework, totalling €1.074 trillion, which will support rural and regional development, and the transformation of our economies in line with the climate transition, research and development, and digital agendas.

I welcome the fact that we have substantially protected the CAP Budget for Ireland and successfully reversed the damaging cuts proposed two years ago. The package agreed includes a special allocation of €300 million for Ireland in recognition of challenges facing our agricultural sector. I also welcome the inclusion of a significant Brexit Adjustment Reserve worth €5 billion to help cushion the impact on those Member States and sectors most affected by Brexit.

Ireland is to receive significant EU funding under the recovery plan to target the immediate response to the Covid crisis – approximately €1.28 billion in 2021/2022, with further funding in 2023 to be targeted at those most impacted economically by the crisis.

It is especially welcome that a special allocation of €120 million for a new PEACE PLUS programme, to which Ireland and the UK will also contribute, will build a significant fund to further reconciliation and North-South cooperation. This will continue the work of the current PEACE and INTERREG programmes in a post-Brexit context.

In terms of Own Resources, I specifically welcome the retention of the VAT based Own Resource, and also welcome the increase in the share of customs collection costs retained by Ireland from 20% to 25%, which will help address the cost of custom infrastructure and other Brexit related costs.

It is also welcome that we have achieved substantial budgets for other priority programmes such as Horizon Europe, Erasmus+ and the EU’s neighbourhood and development cooperation programme. Government will ensure that Departments and agencies work to make sure we maximise Irish draw-down from relevant programmes.

Covid-19 Pandemic

Questions (241)

Gerald Nash

Question:

241. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance if social conditionality as implemented in other EU countries has been attached to the July stimulus package; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18726/20]

View answer

Written answers

By social conditionality I take the Deputy to mean ensuring that a basic level of social protection for the most vulnerable people is included in Government decisions.

The aim of the July Stimulus is to help get Ireland’s businesses back on their feet and get as many people back to work as quickly as possible. The package consists of over fifty measures and represents the largest ever stimulus of its kind at a cost of €5.2 billion.

While I am always conscious of broader societal goals in the work of the Department of Finance, and such considerations were key in the drafting of the July Stimulus package, the specific issue of social conditionality is a matter for the Minister of Employment Affairs and Social Protection.

Insurance Industry

Questions (242)

Gerald Nash

Question:

242. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance the status of his discussions with other Ministers regarding the implementation of a cross-Departmental insurance reform agenda; the deadline for completion of insurance reforms outlined in the Programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18727/20]

View answer

Written answers

As the Deputy is aware, the “Programme for Government – Our shared Future” document lays out commitments that are aimed at addressing consumer and business concerns on the cost of insurance. These commitments include increasing transparency; reviewing duty of care legislation; looking at how to further enhance the role of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, and increasing competition in the market.  Making progress on this work will involve a cross-departmental approach and will build and expand upon previous work done by the Cost of Insurance Working Group.

In terms of discussions with other Ministers, there have been two meetings to date. Firstly, a Ministerial meeting was held on the 14th July, where the Tanaiste and relevant Ministers discussed how best to implement the Government’s insurance reform agenda in a coordinated fashion in order to ensure maximum effect and benefit for insurance policyholders.  Most recently, on the 22nd July, a meeting took place between the Alliance for Insurance Reforms, An Tánaiste Varadkar, Ministers McEntee and McGrath, Ministers of State Fleming and Troy and myself. The meeting with the Alliance was a productive engagement for all sides.

Our focus at present is on defining each Department’s priorities in terms of being able to progress this reform agenda in an effective and coherent way over the next number of months. My Department has written to each relevant Department on this matter. In terms of timelines, I cannot give a definitive answer at this stage, other than to say that every effort will be made to advance it as quickly as possible. In addition, a meeting between myself, Minister of State Fleming and Insurance Ireland is also being arranged so that we can assess their views on where progress can be made.

In conclusion, the Deputy can rest assured that making progress on achieving much needed insurance reform is a key priority for this Government and this is reflected in the Programme for Government.  While implementation of this agenda is a cross-Departmental priority the overall issue remains a key issue for myself and Minister of State Fleming in my Department.

Pensions Reform

Questions (243)

Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

Question:

243. Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill asked the Minister for Finance if he will consider introducing a provision to exempt persons with small pension funds from the 4% drawdown requirement currently applicable to PRSA funds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18729/20]

View answer

Written answers

Personal Retirement Savings Accounts (PRSAs) are low cost, easy-to-access, private pension savings vehicles designed to allow individuals save for retirement flexibly and transfer their pension funds between jobs. They are available to anyone regardless of employment status. The relevant legislation setting out the treatment of PRSAs is contained in Chapter 2A of Part 30 of the Taxes Consolidation Act (TCA) 1997.  Except in limited circumstances, benefits cannot be drawn down until the individual is at least 60 years of age.

An “imputed distribution” regime applies to Approved Retirement Funds (ARFs) and “vested” Personal Retirement Savings Accounts (PRSAs). This regime was extended to vested PRSAs by Budget and Finance Act 2012. When it was originally introduced by Finance Act 2006, it only applied to ARFs. The reason for the introduction of this regime was because many ARF and PRSA owners were not using these funds as intended i.e. to provide an income stream in retirement, but instead as a form of tax-efficient estate planning.

Under the current rules, ARFs and vested PRSAs are subject to a taxable minimum drawdown requirement which varies between 4 per cent and 6 per cent of the value of the assets in the ARF or PRSA. The percentage depends on the individual’s age and the overall size of the fund. PRSA funds can usually only be accessed from the age of 60, except in certain circumstances. If the person is under 70 and their fund is below €2 million in value, then the required annual distribution is 4 per cent of the assets in the fund. If the person is aged over 70 with a fund below €2 million, the distribution is 5 per cent of the assets in the fund. If the fund is over €2 million in value, a 6 per cent distribution applies, irrespective of the age of the individual.

A vested PRSA is a PRSA from which assets are available to the PRSA owner or any other person – in general this is in the form of benefits taken from age 60. So long as a PRSA remains unvested, it can continue to build up tax-free and is not subject to the imputed distribution requirement. In addition, by not vesting the PRSA, the rate of imputed distribution on any ARF(s) and/or other vested PRSA(s) which the individual has, can be kept to a minimum.

On actual drawdown a pension is subject to tax at the individual’s marginal tax rate. The policy rationale underpinning this is that the State provides generous tax relief on both pension contributions and fund growth to ensure that people have sufficient savings to fund their regular costs and expenses during their retirement. It is a form of tax deferral and the income tax and USC paid upon drawdown of a pension are generally lower than the income tax and USC the individual would have paid during their working life. 

Finance Act 2016 made a number of amendments to the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 in order to prevent certain tax avoidance opportunities in relation to PRSAs. A situation was arising where the funds in non-vested PRSAs, on the death of the owner, were being transferred to his or her estate tax-free and, under Capital Acquisitions Tax (CAT) rules, would pass to any surviving spouse tax-free. This was not the intention of PRSA provision – the intention is that when individuals drawdown pension benefits they will pay income tax and the Universal Social Charge (USC).

The changes made in Finance Act 2016 only affects people who, by their 75th birthday, have not taken benefits from their PRSA. Until their 75th birthday they are under no obligation to drawdown any benefits.  The amendments ensure that, where benefits are not taken by the PRSA owner on or before his or her 75th birthday, they will be treated as being taken on that date and, therefore, the PRSA will be treated as “vesting” on that date. From the owner’s 75th birthday, the PRSA assets are subject to the imputed distribution regime that applies to vested PRSAs (and Approved Retirement Funds (ARFs)). They are also treated as a benefit crystallisation event occurring on that date for the purposes of the Standard Fund Threshold regime (which effectively places a lifetime benefit limit of €2 million on an individual’s tax relieved pension fund). Finally, they are treated on the death of the PRSA owner under the provisions relating to ARFs and not by way of a transfer of the PRSA assets to the deceased owner’s estate.

At this time I have no plans to make changes to this policy.

Value Added Tax

Questions (244)

Patricia Ryan

Question:

244. Deputy Patricia Ryan asked the Minister for Finance if he will set the VAT rate on PPE masks to 0%; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18738/20]

View answer

Written answers

As I outlined previously in my answer to Parliamentary Question Nos. 104, 105 and 112 of 20 May 2020 and to Question No. 48 of 9 June 2020 the VAT rate changes implemented by Revenue following the European Commission Decision C (2020)2146, fully implemented the scope for zero rating imports of COVID-19 related goods permitted by the Decision and also implemented a corresponding temporary zero rating of similar, specified domestic supplies.  Any further extension of zero rating to cover supplies of medical equipment and/or personal protection equipment to other sectors and businesses would require a change in legislation at EU level; the VAT Directive would not permit a legislative measure for the application of the zero rate of VAT to such supplies and there are no grounds in the Commission Decision that would support the adoption of such a measure, even on a temporary basis.

Tax Code

Questions (245)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

245. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 that would be raised by tapering out the personal, PAYE and earned income credit by 2.5% per €1,000 on individual income between €100,000 and €140,000 per year resulting in no entitlement to these tax credits in cases in which income is in excess of €140,000 based on the latest individualised income figures available to the Revenue Commissioners. [18755/20]

View answer

Written answers

I am advised by Revenue that the first and full year yield from the Deputy’s proposal is estimated to be of the order of €210 million and €260 million respectively.

These figures are based on tax returns for 2017. An exercise was undertaken using data from these returns to break down the gross incomes of taxpayer units to an individualised level and apply a manual estimation process (outside of Revenue’s usual tax modelling software)  As the exercise could only split gross incomes, this estimation process required a number of assumptions to be made in relation to the distribution of credits.

Universal Social Charge

Questions (246)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

246. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 that would be raised by introducing an additional USC rate of 5% on individual incomes in excess of €140,000 based on the latest individualised income figures available to the Revenue Commissioners. [18756/20]

View answer

Written answers

I am advised by Revenue that if an additional 5% Universal Social Charge (USC) was applied to incomes in excess of €140,000, the estimated first and full year yields would be €228m and €300m respectively.

This assumes that a surcharge would continue to apply to self-employed income above €100,000 in addition to the 5% USC rate suggested by the Deputy. These are estimated 2020 yields, projected from 2017 tax returns, the latest year for which data are currently available and they may be revised. These estimates do not account for changes in taxpayer behaviour.

Tax Code

Questions (247)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

247. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year cost in 2021 of abolishing the local property tax and replacing the funding with central funds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18757/20]

View answer

Written answers

Assuming the current system continues to operate as in 2020, Local Property Tax (LPT) would be expected to collect €485 million in 2021. These receipts would be lost if LPT was abolished.

Property Tax

Questions (248)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

248. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 that would be raised by introducing a non-principal private residence charge of €400 on properties indicated as such by owners in local property tax returns and including commercial landlords but excluding local authorities and approved housing bodies. [18758/20]

View answer

Written answers

I am informed by Revenue that the Ready Reckoner, available at https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/documents/statistics/ready-reckoner.pdf, shows the estimated amounts that could be raised by a charge on non-principal private residences (indicated as such by owners in their LPT returns). The Ready Reckoner shows the yield from a €100 per property charge and the yield from a €400 charge can be estimated on a pro-rata or straight line basis.

Tax Code

Questions (249)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

249. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 from raising the rate of commercial stamp duty to 9%, 10%, 11% and 12.5%, respectively. [18759/20]

View answer

Written answers

I am advised by Revenue that a Ready Reckoner is available on the Revenue Statistics webpage at link: https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/documents/statistics/ready-reckoner.pdf.

This Ready Reckoner shows a wide range of detailed information, including on page 18, changes to the Stamp Duty rate on non-residential property. While the Ready Reckoner does not show the specific costings requested by the Deputy, these can be estimated on a pro-rata or straight-line basis from the data provided.

Pensions Data

Questions (250, 251)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

250. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 that would be raised by reducing the ceiling earnings cap for occupational pension schemes, RACs and PRSAs from €115,000 to €90,000, €80,000, €70,000 and €60,000, respectively. [18760/20]

View answer

Pearse Doherty

Question:

251. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 that would be raised by reducing the standard fund threshold from €2 million to €1.7 million, €1.5million and €1.2 million, respectively. [18761/20]

View answer

Written answers

I propose to take Questions Nos. 250 and 251 together.

The estimated full year yield for each of the proposed decreases in the ceiling for occupational pension schemes, RACs and PRSAs can be found on page 11 of the Revenue Ready Reckoner, published at the link: https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/ready-reckoner/index.aspx.

They are also shown in the below table:

Annual Earnings Cap for Pensions Contributions

Full Year Yield €m

€90,000

59

€80,000

90

€70,000

125

€60,000

166

In relation to the Deputy's question on the Standard Fund Threshold (SFT), the SFT is the maximum allowable pension fund on retirement for tax purposes, which was introduced in Finance Act 2006 to prevent over-funding of pensions through tax-relieved arrangements. The threshold was initially set at €5 million but was subsequently reduced to €2.3 million with effect from 7 December 2010 and further reduced to €2 million with effect from 1 January 2014.

Information on the numbers and values of individual pension funds or on individual accrued benefits in pension schemes are not generally required to be supplied to Revenue. Therefore, there is no readily available underlying data or methodology on which to base reliable estimates of any possible yield which might be realised from the reductions in the Standard Fund Threshold outlined by the Deputy.

Help-To-Buy Scheme

Questions (252)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

252. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 that would be raised by abolishing the help to buy scheme. [18762/20]

View answer

Written answers

The Help to Buy scheme (HTB) is an income tax incentive measure designed to assist first-time buyers with the deposit required to purchase or self-build a new house or apartment to live in as their home. The legislation originally contained a sunset clause for 31 December 2019.

Finance Act 2019 section 477C of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 was amended to provide for a two year extension to the scheme to 31 December 2021. In the Budget 2020 Tax Policy Changes publication I provided details of the estimated cost of this measure for the tax years 2020 and 2021. It was estimated that the full cost of the measure would be €100 million in each tax year.

In terms of the Deputy's question, and bearing in mind that HTB is a demand led scheme which is subject to a broad range of variables, including housing completion rates and prices, it is not possible to provide a reliable estimate of the savings that would arise from abolition of the scheme.  

As the Deputy will be aware, I recently announced a temporary enhancement to the scheme, relating to the quantum of support that is available to first time buyers, as part of the July Stimulus package.

Tax Code

Questions (253)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

253. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full-year revenue in 2021 that would be raised by abolishing the special assignee relief programme. [18763/20]

View answer

Written answers

I am informed by Revenue that the annual cost of the Special Assignee Relief Programme (SARP) for 2012 to 2017 (the most recent year for which data are available) is as follows:

Year

€m

2012

0.1

2013

1.9

2014

5.9

2015

9.5

2016

18.1

2017

28.1

Further information can be found at the following link:

https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/documents/research/sarp-report-2017.pdf.

It is not possible to estimate with any degree of reliability the likely savings that would accrue to the Exchequer in 2021 or in the years beyond that if the SARP were abolished.

The reason for this is that there are currently no data available that would enable such a calculation to be made. The Deputy will be aware that in Finance Bill 2018 I re-imposed an upper salary ceiling of €1 million on the relief with effect of 1 January 2019 for new entrants and for existing beneficiaries of the programme from 1 January 2020. Such data as are available within the system relate to years before 2019 (no cap existed between 2015 and 2019). It would therefore be necessary to assess the cost-saving impact of cap as well as taking account of evolution in the take up of the relief during the current year in order to estimate the savings that might arise in 2021 from the abolition of the programme.

Mortgage Interest Relief

Questions (254)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

254. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the full-year cost and budgetary impact in 2021 of maintaining the current rate of mortgage interest relief; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18764/20]

View answer

Written answers

Mortgage interest relief (MIR) for persons with a qualifying mortgage loan on a principal private residence is only available on a tapered basis for loans taken out between 2004 and 2012. The relief will end on 31 December 2020. In 2019, 50% of the interest on a relevant loan qualified for relief while for 2020 the amount is tapered to 25%.

I am advised by Revenue that the cost of MIR in 2019 was approximately €60 million. The projected cost in 2020 is in the order of €35 million and the cost of retaining the relief at this level would likely result in a similar annual cost.

Top
Share