Written Answers Nos. 499-517
499. Deputy Marian Harkin asked the Minister for Finance if he will review the whole area of insurance reform and consider capping general damages for minor injuries by an average of 80% compared to the previous book of quantum guidelines (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19225/21]
View answerThe Government has prioritised the reform of the insurance sector in order to improve the cost and availability of this key financial service, including for businesses. The Action Plan for Insurance Reform sets out 66 actions in this regard across several policy areas, including my Department, with 95% due for completion by end 2021. At a recent Government meeting, the Cabinet reflected upon the work of the Cabinet Sub-Group on Insurance Reform, which oversees the implementation of the Action Plan, and to note of the considerable progress made in the first three months of this year. Achievements include:
- The adoption of new Personal Injuries Guidelines by the Judicial Council.
- The creation of an Office to Promote Competition in the Insurance Market within the Department of Finance.
- The launch of a public consultation on proposals to reform the Personal Injuries Assessment Board.
The new Personal Injuries Guidelines significantly reduce award levels for many categories of common injury, particularly those of soft tissue, and provide further details on how these should be assessed. Also of note is that a number of common injuries will now move to the jurisdiction of the District rather than the Circuit Court, thus reducing the associated legal fees. The Guidelines also provide guidance in relation to injuries previously not included in the Book of Quantum and will be used by both the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) and judiciary. Therefore, in addition to the lower awards and legal fees, the new Guidelines should provide more certainty to claimants and insurers, and as such reinforce the benefits of using the PIAB for claims settlement. This in turn should further reduce the costs of claims, particularly legal fees. The new Guidelines will come into effect on 24 April, which is ahead of it's July 2021 schedule.
While the issue of capping award levels is a matter for the Minister for Justice, I would note that, under the Action Plan for Insurance Reform, the Department of Justice is to report on the implementation and early impact of the new Guidelines, and to examine a relevant policy response by the end of the year, taking account of the LRC’s conclusions. That said, I would also note that the Law Reform Commission’s (LRC) Report on Capping Damages in Personal Injuries Actions concluded that it would be entirely appropriate, and desirable, that the new Guidelines be given some time to be applied in practice. While I note that some may feel the reduced award levels do not go far enough, I believe that it needs to be recognised that this was carefully considered by the Judiciary. As such, a period of reflection to assess their implementation may be approapriate before considering any further measures.
In summary, the Personal Injuries Guidelines, in conjunction with other strands of the insurance reform agenda, should improve both the cost and availability of insurance for businesses, consumers, and other voluntary, sporting and community groups. The Deputy can be assured that the Government is committed to achieving a more sustainable and competitive insurance market, and is continuing to progress other aspects of the Action Plan for Insurance Reform .
500. Deputy Mattie McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the estimated amount of State funding provided to An Taisce every year for the past five years; the categories under which such funding has been provided; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19285/21]
View answerI can advise the Deputy that my Department has no record of any funding being provided to the organisation named in the past five years. I wish to note that my response refers only to Department of Finance records and I cannot comment on behalf of other Government Departments.
501. Deputy Thomas Gould asked the Minister for Finance the amount of betting excise duty collected in each of the years 2019, 2020 and to date in 2021, by month. [19317/21]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that the monthly breakdown of betting duty collected in each of the years 2019, 2020 and for the first three months of 2021 are shown in the table below.
Receipts for 2020 and 2021 are provisional at this time and may be subject to adjustment.
|
- |
2019 |
2020 |
2021 |
|
Prov. |
Prov. |
||
|
€m |
€m |
€m |
|
|
JAN |
10.6 |
25.2 |
21.5 |
|
FEB |
2.3 |
0.4 |
0.2 |
|
MAR |
0.6 |
0.2 |
0.1 |
|
APR |
20.5 |
15.1 |
|
|
MAY |
0.8 |
2.7 |
|
|
JUN |
0.4 |
7.5 |
|
|
JUL |
26.9 |
8.1 |
|
|
AUG |
6.2 |
0.3 |
|
|
SEP |
0.2 |
0.5 |
|
|
OCT |
26.1 |
26.3 |
|
|
NOV |
0.5 |
0.4 |
|
|
DEC |
0.2 |
0.1 |
|
|
TOTAL |
95.0 |
86.8 |
21.8 |
502. Deputy Thomas Gould asked the Minister for Finance the amount of betting excise duty provided to the HSE in 2020. [19318/21]
View answerThere is no direct hypothecation of betting duty to particular causes. Rather, revenues raised from betting duty go directly to the Exchequer and are then partly used to fund the Health, Justice and Welfare systems including the HSE, which bear the costs of problem gambling.
503. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Minister for Finance if he will address a matter (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19337/21]
View answer505. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Finance if he will address a matter in relation to directors' salaries and tax warehousing (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19481/21]
View answer508. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance his views on matters raised in correspondence by a person (details supplied) in relation to changes introduced by the Revenue Commissioners regarding credit in respect of tax deducted from emoluments of certain directors and employees; his further views on whether this is a departure from the established practice; his views on this new initiative by the Revenue Commissioners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19529/21]
View answer509. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance his views on matters raised by a person (details supplied) in relation to recent changes by the Revenue Commissioners regarding credit in respect of tax deducted from emoluments of certain directors and employees; his views on this new initiative by the Revenue Commissioners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19560/21]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 503, 505, 508 and 509 together.
Section 997A of the Taxes Consolidation Act (TCA) 1997 - ‘Credit in respect of tax deducted from the emoluments of certain directors’ - was introduced by way of section 13 of the Finance Act 2005.
The section applies to directors or employees who have a material interest in a company that pays emoluments to the director or employee. A director or employee has a material interest where he or she is the beneficial owner of, or is able to control directly or indirectly, more than 15% of the ordinary share capital of the company paying the emoluments. While section 997A applies equally to directors and employees who have a material interest in a company, in practice, it is more likely to affect directors.
In determining whether a director or employee owns more than 15% of the ordinary share capital of a company, in addition to the amount of share capital owned in their own right by the director or employee, shareholdings in the company held by any person connected with the director or employee are also taken into consideration. A person is considered connected if that person is the individual’s husband, wife or civil partner, or is a relative, or the husband, wife or civil partner of a relative, of the individual or of the individual’s husband, wife or civil partner. A person may also be connected to another person through a partnership or a company. This definition is set out in section 10 TCA 1997.
The purpose of section 997A is to ensure that such directors and employees do not get a credit for income tax (including the Universal Social Charge (USC) and PRSI) deducted from their remuneration until such tax, USC and PRSI has actually been paid over to the Collector General. In that way, it protects the integrity of the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) system of tax deduction.
The provision also ensures that payments of payroll taxes made by companies are first allocated against the tax liability of its ordinary employees. The legislation, therefore, seeks to protect ordinary employees by giving priority to the payment of their payroll taxes above those who control more than 15% of the ordinary share capital of the company.
I can confirm that this is not a new initiative. Revenue has also advised me that there is no change in practice in relation to section 997A and the arrangements, including the conditions around persons connected with a relevant director or employee, have been operational for over 15 years since the legislation came into effect in 2005.
Revenue recently updated its Tax and Duty Manual (TDM 42-04-59) to deal with the interaction of section 997A with the ‘debt warehousing’ arrangements that were initially introduced in the Financial Measures (Covid-19) (No. 2) Act 2020. The updated information contained in TDM 42-04-59 was previously published in November 2020 in the ROS Pay and File Tax and Duty Manual (TDM 38-06-01a).
The Financial Measures (Covid-19) (No. 2) Act 2020 legislated for “warehousing” of PAYE (Employer) liabilities beginning with the February 2020 income tax month. Similar measures were introduced in Finance Act 2020 to provide for warehousing of certain self-assessed income tax liabilities. For both PAYE and income tax warehousing, the liabilities that may be warehoused are those from what is called “Period 1”. In the case of PAYE (Employer) liabilities, Period 1 refers to the period when a business has been unable to trade due to the Covid-19 related restrictions and includes the first two months after the business resumes trading. For self-assessed income tax liabilities, Period 1 refers to the return filing date in 2020. In certain circumstances, Period 1 for income tax warehousing can be extended by twelve months to the return filing date in 2021.
Warehoused liabilities are subject to no interest during Period 2, which is twelve months beginning at the end of Period 1. In Period 3, the final period of the warehousing scheme, the warehoused liabilities are subject to interest at c. 3% per annum until the debt is discharged.
In circumstances where an employer warehouses PAYE (Employer) liabilities, including liabilities relating to a director or employee who has a material interest in her/his employer company and who is also a self-assessed income tax payer, that director or employee will not, on filing her/his income tax return, be entitled to credit for PAYE deducted from her/his salary. This is because that amount has not been paid over to the Collector-General by the employer but instead has been warehoused.
However, if the director or employee meets the conditions for income tax warehousing (because they are also subject to self-assessment), she or he can warehouse all liabilities, including any liabilities relating to her/his employment income. A key condition of eligibility is that the individual’s total income for 2020 is expected to be at least 25% less than their total income for 2019. The general terms of the scheme as they apply to income tax can be found in section 3.2 of the information booklet on Debt Warehousing which can be found on the Revenue website.
I am further advised that if the conditions legislated for in section 997A were not in place, an individual who is in a position to exercise significant control over a business through his/her shareholding, and can decide whether and when tax debts of the business are paid, could conceivably make additional tax credit and relief claims in the normal course of events and receive refunds of tax even though none of the tax in question had been remitted to Revenue by the business.
Revenue has been to the forefront during the past year in administering the various support schemes that have been introduced to provide much needed assistance to businesses affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. Revenue has also taken a very pragmatic approach during these unprecedented times of delivering on its primary mandate to collect taxes and duties, while adhering to the legislative framework within which it operates. The fact that PAYE (Employer) liabilities have been warehoused is not a reason to disregard the provisions of section 997A and as already outlined, eligible owners of businesses, including those in the SME sector, can avail of the debt warehousing arrangements in the relation to their own personal tax liabilities.
504. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Finance if he has considered encouraging employers who are financially able to help contribute to employees tax bills garnered as a result of the temporary wage subsidy scheme to alleviate the burden on workers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19412/21]
View answerThe Temporary Wage Subsidy Scheme (TWSS) was introduced on 26 March 2020. It was legislated for in Section 28 of the Emergency Measure in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 and was an emergency measure to deal with the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the economy. Over 66,500 employers were supported through the TWSS in respect of more than 664,000 employees at a cost of €2.9bn. The Scheme operated until 31 August 2020 and was replaced by the Employment Wage Subsidy Scheme (EWSS) from 1 September 2020.
It will be recalled that in order to maximise the financial support provided to recipients, income tax and the Universal Social Charge (USC) on TWSS payments was not collected in real-time through the PAYE system and instead the liability for the 2020 tax year was determined at the end of the year by Revenue through the regular ‘end year review’ process.
Revenue made a Preliminary End of Year Statement available to all employees from 15 January 2021, including those who were in receipt of the TWSS. The Preliminary End of Year Statement includes information relating to an employee’s income received, including pensions and income from the Department of Social Protection, as well as their tax credit entitlements. For the tax year 2020, the Statement also includes information on the amounts of TWSS payments, if any, received by each employee. In addition, the Statement provides employees with a preliminary calculation of the tax and USC position for 2020 and indicates whether their tax position is balanced, underpaid, or overpaid for the year.
Upon viewing the Preliminary End of Year Statement through myAccount, which is Revenue’s secure online facility for individual taxpayer services, employees have an opportunity to complete their income tax return for 2020, declaring any additional income and claiming any additional tax credits due, for example qualifying health expenses, to arrive at their final liability for 2020.
When a liability is finalised, individuals may opt to fully or partially pay any income tax and USC liability through the Payments/Repayments facility in myAccount. Where individuals do not opt to fully or partially pay, Revenue will collect the liability by reducing their tax credits over 4 years, interest free. The reduction of tax credits will start in January 2022.
Revenue has also confirmed that it will facilitate employers who wish to pay the income tax and USC liabilities of their employees where such liabilities arise from the TWSS. Details of these arrangements are available on the Revenue website at www.revenue.ie/en/employing-people/twss/employers/index.aspx. Should an employer wish to pay these liabilities on behalf of their employees, on an exceptional, once-off basis and subject to certain conditions, Revenue will not apply the Benefit-in-Kind rules that would usually apply where employers make payments of this nature on behalf of their employees.
It should be noted that employers paying amounts to settle employee income tax liabilities will not be entitled to the usual tax deduction in respect of such payments, as the payments would not be regarded as wholly and exclusively incurred for the purposes of the employer’s trade or profession.
To prevent any abuse of this arrangement, while still allowing the employer sufficient time to consider the option on behalf of their employees, this facility is limited to payments made by employers on behalf of their employees up to end June 2021.
I would encourage any employers who are in a position to discharge such liabilities on behalf of their workers to do so, but I also acknowledge that the question of whether an employer pays the income tax/USC owed by employees in respect of the TWSS is a matter between the employer and the relevant employee.
In this regard, an individual’s entitlements and rights in an employment context, the amount of wages that an employer may be legally obliged to pay employees in respect of hours worked as well as an employer’s capacity to pay wages to employees in light of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the employer’s business are all matters that are outside the remit of TWSS.
The EWSS, which replaced the TWSS from 1 September 2020, re-established the normal requirement to operate PAYE on all employee salaries, providing for the regular deduction and remittance of income tax, USC and employee PRSI.
506. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Finance if he has considered introducing legislation to compel insurance companies to offer flood protection to all who wish to avail of it; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19505/21]
View answerAt the outset, it is important to state that the provision of insurance is a commercial matter for insurance companies, which is based on an assessment of the risks they are willing to accept. Consequently, neither I nor the Central Bank of Ireland can interfere in the provision or pricing of insurance products. This position is reinforced by the EU framework for insurance (Solvency II Directive).
Legislating for compulsory flood insurance was an option considered by my Department in its review of policy in relation to flood insurance in 2016, which formed part of the ‘Interdepartmental Flood Policy Coordination Group Interim Report’. It was found that such an approach would have limited impact on the availability of flood cover as it would simply result in, amongst other things, insurers pricing prohibitively for high risk properties; an increase in the pricing of low to medium risk properties; and the risk that insurers decide to withdraw from the market altogether. My Department has outlined the different policy options and challenges associated with flood insurance in the Paper published in 2019 entitled ‘Public Consultation on Climate Change and Insurance in the context of the ‘Climate Action Plan 2019 to Tackle Climate Breakdown ’.
Having said that, I am conscious of the difficulties that the absence or withdrawal of flood insurance cover can cause to homeowners and businesses. The Government is investing almost €1 billion in flood relief measures over the lifetime of the National Development Plan 2018-2027 with an expectation that insurers will provide cover where this has occurred. This approach is complemented by a Memorandum of Understanding between the Office of Public Works (OPW) and industry representatives Insurance Ireland. This provides for the exchange of data in relation to completed flood defence schemes which should, in turn, provide a basis for the increased provision of flood insurance in these areas.
Finally, I acknowledge that while there has been an overall increase in the provision of flood insurance between 2015 and 2020, some householders are still experiencing difficulties. This is particularly the case for households in areas with demountable flood defences. My officials are engaging with both Insurance Ireland, the OPW and other stakeholders regarding flood defence schemes and how the levels of insurance cover might be improved in areas where flood defence works have been completed. This is a difficult issue, however the Deputy should be assured that Minister of State Fleming and I will also continue to engage on all aspects of insurance reform, including flood insurance issues, and that every effort is being made to encourage a responsive approach from the insurance industry.
507. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance his views on the recently enunciated position by the US with regard to global corporation tax reform; his plans to provide detailed forecasts on the proposed policy impact of the US corporation tax reform proposals presented to the OECD on Ireland; the estimated potential loss of corporation tax receipts per annum for each year to 2030, in tabular form if this proposal is implemented; the policy changes he is considering in order to sustainably replace the estimated loss to the Exchequer; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19520/21]
View answerI am aware of the broad reform programme ‘The American Jobs Plan’ published by the White House on 31 March, which includes proposals in respect to corporation tax reform and a commitment by the US to seek ‘a global agreement on a strong minimum tax through multilateral negotiations’. These proposals are already the subject of intense scrutiny and extensive debate in the United States, and at this stage it is far from certain what form the current proposals will take as the process moves towards completion.
Similarly, while the renewed engagement by the United States at the OECD is welcome, it is important to remember that there remain substantial issues to resolve before a consensus can be reached among the 139 member jurisdictions of the OECD Inclusive Framework, the decision-making body for how to address the challenges arising from digitalisation.
The implementation of the proposed changes to US corporate taxation should not operate so as to have a direct impact on Irish corporation tax receipts. However, if the proposed changes were to be enacted in full it is possible that they could result in behavioural changes by US multinationals, with indirect impacts on corporation tax receipts here. However, it would not be possible to estimate the impact on Ireland of such behavioural changes at this stage.
The US has also made a proposal at OECD to re-shape the OECD work known as Pillar One, which is focused on reallocating profits to market jurisdictions. That US proposal is to include almost all types of companies – not just highly-digitalised or consumer-facing companies – but also to introduce turnover and profitability thresholds at such levels that only the world’s largest and most profitable corporations would be impacted. This US Pillar One proposal is not yet sufficiently settled or fleshed out to estimate the potential impact on Ireland and corporation tax receipts here.
My Department previously estimated the annual cost to the Irish Exchequer of agreement of BEPS related measures pillars could be between €800m and €2bn, depending on the design of the final agreement, and in the absence of further certainty, this remains the working assumption for now. There is still a large degree of uncertainty as to the ultimate outcome of reform efforts, and this estimate will be revised when there is more clarity about the potential impact. If agreement is reached this year, it is likely that it will be several years before full implementation.
Ireland has seen the benefits of international cooperation, and we wish to achieve a sustainable, robust and growth-friendly agreement. However, I have concerns that the proposal for a minimum global tax rate could go beyond the need to address aggressive tax planning.
Small countries, such as Ireland, need to be able to use tax policy as a legitimate lever to compensate for advantages of scale, resources and location enjoyed by larger countries. At the same time, we accept that there needs to be boundaries to ensure any competition is fair and sustainable. The work at the OECD is a complex mix of various interconnected components and any final agreement on the overall work will need to form a complete package which is sustainable, fair, and grounded in principle if it is to be acceptable to all countries, small and large, developed and developing. If all countries can show flexibility and are prepared to compromise, we believe that a comprehensive and fair solution is feasible.
510. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Finance if any of the bond sales on behalf of the State or the NTMA and brokered by a company (details supplied) were sold to parties connected to the company, nominees, associates or subsidiaries of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19617/21]
View answer511. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Finance if a company (details supplied) has declared any potential conflicts of interest to the State in the bond dealings of same on behalf of the State or NTMA; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19618/21]
View answer512. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Finance the process by which a company (details supplied) was appointed to sell bonds on behalf of the State and NTMA; if he is satisfied that the procurement of the company was in compliance with Irish procurement law; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19619/21]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 510, 511 and 512 together.
The NTMA uses a network of primary dealers to sell Irish Government Bonds. There are currently fourteen primary dealers. Bond sales are mainly through two methods, bond syndications and bond auctions.
Bond syndications involve assembling a syndicate of primary dealers, usually six, from the full network of primary dealers. The syndicate works with the NTMA to launch new bonds or significant taps of existing bonds. The size of bond syndications is typically €3 billion and upwards. Bonds sold through a syndicate are sold to end investors who may choose to hold the bonds to maturity or trade them themselves. The primary dealers invite institutional and other investors to submit orders for the bonds and the prices which they are willing to pay for them. As such investors can include companies affiliated with a primary dealer or be a primary dealer itself; bonds would have been sold to Davy along with other primary dealers.
Bond auctions involve the sale of bonds to primary dealers in a competitive auction process on an electronic platform. Allocations to primary dealers by this method are made in accordance with the bid prices with the final price of each bond set at a cut-off level as determined by the NTMA. In the case of bond auctions all primary dealers including Davy were obliged to bid for bonds and a primary dealer such as Davy would have been allocated bonds if their bid was at or above the cut-off level.
Separately, Davy was appointed by the NTMA to sell corporate bonds held in ISIF (period checked 2014-2021). The contract contained selling restrictions, including a restriction on Davy offering or selling the bonds to Davy or any affiliate, partner, officer, director or employee of Davy.
No potential conflicts were declared in respect of the sale of the above bonds.
Financial services in connection with the sale of bonds are excluded from the scope of the EU (Award of Public Authority Contracts) Regulations 2016.
514. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance if all vacancies (details supplied) are advertised; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19814/21]
View answer517. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance if any person can apply for a position (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19869/21]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 514 and 517 together.
The State Boards under the remit of my Department are the Central Bank Commission, the Credit Union Restructuring Board, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman, Home Building Finance Ireland, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, the National Asset Management Agency, the National Treasury Management Agency and the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland. It should be noted that having concluded its restructuring work in 2017, the Credit Union Restructuring Board was operationally wound down in 2017 and is awaiting formal dissolution. No further appointments will be made to this State Board.
In 2011, the Government introduced new arrangements to increase openness and transparency in the selection of appointees to State Boards. Following a Government Decision in 2014, substantial reforms to the existing appointments system to State Boards were introduced. In November 2014, the Department for Public Expenditure and Reform published guidelines for appointments to State Boards which set out requirements which would apply to all State Board appointments. Among the objectives underlying this reform of the appointments system is to increase access and widen the pool from which potential appointees to State Boards are drawn.
Other than the appointment of members on an ex-officio basis , positions on the State Boards under the aegis of my Department are advertised on the State Boards website and appointments are made in accordance with the 2014 guidelines for appointments to State Boards.
While particular requirements apply in relation to the desirable composition of each individual State Board in terms of knowledge, skills and experience of its members, all suitable and competent individuals can apply for a position on a State Board under the aegis of my Department.
515. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance his views on the recent statement by the IMF in respect of the prospect of a solidarity surcharge (details supplied) to support economic recovery globally; if he will commit to producing a well-designed system of net wealth taxes to support Ireland’s economic recovery and public investment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19834/21]
View answerI am aware of suggestions for a solidarity tax to be imposed on those companies that appear to have fared better during the pandemic. While I understand why some may feel this is justified, I would urge caution.
2021 will be a critical year for International Tax as we seek agreement at the OECD on addressing the tax challenges of digitalisation. I believe that we should focus on seeking a global solution which will also support research, development and innovation.
We must acknowledge the important role played by innovative sectors of the economy. The growing digitalisation of business in recent years has allowed many parts of the economy to continue to function while others were forced to close. This has enabled home working and allowed trade in essential goods and services to continue.
Furthermore, the fact that sectors of the economy have continued to function has allowed Governments to extend supports to other sectors of the economy who have fared less well particularly in areas such as hospitality and retail.
Most importantly, we should acknowledge the remarkable work of the pharmaceutical sector in rapidly developing vaccines which I believe will be key to allow us to return to our normal lives as quickly as possible.
With regard to wealth taxes, I would remind the Deputy that Ireland already taxes wealth in a variety of ways, such as our Capital Acquisitions Tax (CAT) and Capital Gains Tax (CGT) and which are levied on an individual or company on the disposal of an asset in the case of CGT, or the acquisition of an asset through gift or inheritance, in the case of CAT.
The Local Property Tax, which was introduced in 2013, is a tax based on the market value of residential properties, and can also be categorised as a form of tax on wealth.
It is also important to understand where Ireland stands in relation to the distribution of wealth. In 2013, the Central Statistics Office conducted the Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS) providing the first comprehensive data on household wealth in Ireland. The survey provides information on the ownership and values of different types of assets and liabilities along with more general information on income, employment and household composition. The data indicated that wealth inequality in Ireland for 2013, as measured by the Gini Coefficient, was lower than the euro area average.
The Central Bank recently published a research report presenting results from the 2018 HFCS which highlights the improved financial position and resilience of households prior to the COVID-19 crisis.
The Central Bank's new report 'Household wealth: what is it, who has it and why it matters' shows that Irish household net wealth grew by over €76,000 for the median household between 2013 and 2018, and that wealth inequality here for 2018, as measured by the Gini Coefficient, remains lower than the euro area average It also notes that "the data highlight the improved financial position and resilience of households".
The report highlights that a significant portion of wealth for most households was tied up in the family home, and that increases in house prices (74% increase for the period) was a major factor in the reported increase in household wealth.
My officials continue to examine all issues related to taxation, including wealth taxation, on an on-going basis, and they and I will monitor and consider any additional information and data that comes to light. I do not, however, have any plans to introduce a tax measure along the lines of that sought by the Deputy at this time.
Countries will need to repair public finances once we have emerged from the pandemic. This will require us to be open to ideas and Ireland will give careful consideration to any proposals which may be helpful. However, I believe that innovation needs to be encouraged, and I remain to be convinced on taxes which target specific innovative sectors.
516. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 86 and 87 of 1 April 2021, the yield from the sugar sweetened drinks tax in respect of the breakdown of the categories; if the Revenue Commissioners or his Department collect data in respect of the revenue collected by sugar sweetened drinks tax rates in terms of the sugar content and rate of duty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19856/21]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that returns for the Sugar Sweetened Drinks Tax (SSDT) require that supplies liable to the tax be categorised into two bands, based on their sugar content. These two bands are where the sugar content is 5g or more per 100ml but less than 8g per 100ml (Band 1) and supplies where the sugar content is 8g or more per 100ml (Band 2).
The current SSDT rates charged are €16.23 per hectolitre on supplies in Band 1 and €24.39 per hectolitre on supplies in Band 2.
The breakdown of SSDT yield by Band for the years 2018 to 2021 are shown in the table below. Receipts for 2020 are provisional and 2021 receipts is in the year to date.
|
- |
Band 1 |
Band 2 |
Total |
|
€m |
€m |
€m |
|
|
2018 |
1.8 |
14.5 |
16.3 |
|
2019 |
3.4 |
29.6 |
33.0 |
|
2020 |
3.5 |
27.8 |
31.3 |
|
2021 (to date) |
0.8 |
8.6 |
9.4 |
