Written Answers Nos. 155-174
155. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Finance the number of exemptions in respect of local property tax, and the number of deferrals sought and granted in respect of local property tax, in 2022 and to date in 2023; the value of LPT forgone as a consequence; and if he will provide the information in tabular form. [40956/23]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that the available information in respect of the number of Local Property Tax exemptions and deferrals claimed for the year 2022 is published on the Revenue website at: www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/documents/statistics/lpt/lpt-stats-update-120723.pdf.For the year 2022, the estimated Local Property Tax foregone as a result of exemptions is approximately €5.4 million. For the same period, the estimated tax forgone as a result of deferrals is approximately €2.9 million.
For the year 2023, information in respect of exemptions and deferrals claimed and the revenue foregone associated with deferrals is available in the most recent LPT Quarterly Report at:www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/documents/statistics/lpt/lpt-stats-update-140723.pdf.
An update of this information will be published in the coming weeks. The estimated Local Property Tax foregone as a result of exemptions in 2023 is approximately €5.3 million to date.
156. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Minister for Finance to respond to concerns raised by a person (details supplied) in respect of what they believe is holding up the supply of properties above shops and so on; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40982/23]
View answerCapital Acquisitions Tax (CAT) is a tax on gifts and inheritances that is payable by the person receiving the gift or inheritance (the beneficiary) on the taxable value of the property received.
The relationship between the person giving a gift or inheritance (the disponer) and the beneficiary determines the maximum amount, known as the “Group threshold”, below which CAT does not arise. Any prior gift or inheritance received by a beneficiary since 5 December 1991 from within the same Group threshold is aggregated for the purposes of determining whether any tax is payable on a benefit. Where a person receives gifts or inheritances that are in excess of the relevant Group threshold, CAT at a rate of 33% applies on the excess. For information on CAT thresholds, see www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/cat-thresholds-rates-and-aggregation-rules/index.aspx.
I am advised by Revenue that sections 90 to 102 of the Capital Acquisitions Tax Consolidation Act (CATCA) 2003 provide for a relief from CAT known as “business relief”. Business relief takes the form of a 90% reduction in the taxable value of gifted or inherited business property. CAT is payable on the reduced value, to the extent that it exceeds the relevant Group threshold.
The relief was primarily introduced to encourage enterprise, support the intergenerational transfer of family businesses and to prevent the sale or break-up of businesses in order to pay the CAT liability.
In order for business relief to apply, assets that are the subject of the gift or inheritance must comprise “relevant business property” as defined in the legislation. Relevant business property includes unincorporated businesses, unquoted shares in certain family companies, and assets used wholly or mainly for the purposes of a business carried on by a family company or a partnership, but not owned by the company or partnership. A business consisting wholly or mainly of dealing in land, shares, securities or currencies or making or holding investments (e.g. the letting of furnished or unfurnished accommodation, whether on a long or short-term basis) does not qualify for relief.
The legislation makes specific provision for land and buildings that are not wholly used for the purposes of the business concerned. In such cases, the asset is treated as two separate assets consisting of the part used exclusively for business purposes and the part that is not. This allows for business relief to be claimed in respect of that part of the property that is used wholly and mainly for the business. This provision may be applicable in the types of circumstances described in the constituent’s email to the deputy.
Reflecting the policy rationale for the introduction of business relief, in particular the prevention of the sale or break-up of businesses in order to pay the CAT liability, the legislation provides for business relief to be clawed back if the relevant business property is sold, redeemed or compulsorily acquired within 6 years of the date of the gift or inheritance or if the business ceases to be carried on within that 6-year period. Therefore, relief should not be claimed where the beneficiary of the gift or inheritance does not intend to retain ownership of the relevant business property and carry on the business concerned for the required 6-year period.
This clawback provision may be the “six year penalty” the constituent is referring to in his email.
In the absence of a specific claim for relief, and of knowledge of all the facts pertaining to such a claim, it is not possible to say conclusively whether the relief is available in a particular case or whether it ceases to apply due to the operation of a clawback. However, I am advised that Revenue is not aware of any practice whereby residential properties attaching to businesses are deliberately left vacant so as to avoid a clawback of business relief. As set out above, it is likely that such properties should not be part of the claim for relief in the first instance.
Business relief is dealt with comprehensively in the CAT legislation and further guidance is available in Revenue’s Tax and Duty Manual which is available at www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/capital-acquisitions-tax/cat-part12.pdf.
157. Deputy Michael Lowry asked the Minister for Finance whether his Department proposes to increase the pension threshold from €2 million to €2.4 million (details supplied); if he agrees that this proposed increase would support middle-income earners in maintaining their current standard of living and incentivise greater participation in private pension schemes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40997/23]
View answer173. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Minister for Finance if he will respond to concerns raised by a person (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41288/23]
View answer187. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Finance if he has reviewed the value of the thresholds set out for tax relief on pensions; and if he will consider adjusting them, in view of the substantial inflation since they were set almost ten years ago. [41437/23]
View answer188. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Finance if he will adjust the cap on pension contributions in Budget 2024 (details supplied). [41438/23]
View answer190. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Finance if he will review correspondence on a matter (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41466/23]
View answer191. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Finance if he will review correspondence on a matter (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41467/23]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 157, 173, 187, 188, 190 and 191 together.
I understand that Deputy Lowry, in line with Deputies O'Dowd, Bruton, Troy and Smyth, is referring to the chargeable excess tax and Standard Fund Threshold (SFT) regime.
I am advised by Revenue that the SFT was introduced in Finance Act 2005, with the purpose of addressing excessive pension accrual, and it applies to all private and public sector pension arrangements. It is provided for in Chapter 2C of Part 30 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (TCA) which sets out the maximum tax-relieved pension fund at retirement. If the relevant threshold is exceeded, the excess over the threshold (the “chargeable excess”) is subject to an upfront, ring-fenced income tax charge (known as “chargeable excess tax”) at 40%.
The SFT was initially set at €5 million. The legislation allowed the Minister for Finance to amend the SFT in line with an “earnings adjustment factor”, which has happened on two occasions. The SFT was reduced to €2.3 million in December 2010 as part of a package of measures to deliver significant savings in the broad pension area following agreement reached with the EU/IMF.
The SFT was further reduced in Finance Act 2013 to €2 million, with effect from 1 January 2014, as part of reforms introduced to make supplementary pension provision more sustainable and equitable over the long term. The primary purpose of these changes was to further restrict the capacity of higher earners to fund or accrue large pensions through tax-subsidised sources.
It is not the case that increases in the CPI or other measures of purchasing power should necessarily automatically result in an increase to the SFT. However, as with all taxes, the tax treatment of supplementary pensions, including the SFT is kept under ongoing review.
158. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 321 of 7 March 2023, to estimate the cost to the Exchequer if the planned increase in excise duty on petrol and diesel does not go ahead; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41089/23]
View answerI am informed by Revenue that the cost of not proceeding with the 31 October 2023 increase on petrol, diesel and MGO for a year is approximately €296m.
159. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Finance the reason capital gains tax is applicable (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41097/23]
View answerIn general, capital gains tax (CGT) is chargeable on a gain arising on the disposal of an asset at the rate of 33 per cent. The first €1,270 of chargeable gains of an individual in any year are exempt from CGT. The transfer of an asset by a person to his or her child constitutes a disposal of that asset for CGT purposes. Where an asset is transferred other than by way of a bargain at arm’s length, e.g., between connected persons or as a gift, it is deemed to be disposed of and acquired at its market value on that date.
From the details supplied, it appears that a mother intends to transfer assets, being land and a house, to her son. Based on these facts, it appears that the transfer will constitute a disposal for the purposes of CGT and, subject to relief being available, a CGT liability may arise in respect of any gain which accrues to the mother on the disposal. No details have been provided as to the consideration, if any, which will pass from son to mother on the disposal of these assets; however, as set out above, the disposal by the mother of the assets and the acquisition of same by the son will be deemed to take place at market value on the date of disposal. If this market value exceeds the cost which the mother incurred, or is deemed to have incurred, when she acquired the assets, a chargeable gain, in respect of which CGT may be due, arises.
Depending on the circumstances, certain CGT reliefs may apply to the disposal of these assets. Section 604 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides relief from CGT on the disposal of an individual’s principal private residence; and section 599 provides relief from CGT on the disposal by an individual, who has attained 55 years of age, of certain qualifying business or agricultural assets where the disposal is to a child of the individual.
As it is unclear whether consideration will pass on the disposal of assets from mother to son, it should also be noted that a charge to capital acquisitions tax (CAT) may arise if the transfer occurs by way of gift. Where CGT and CAT are chargeable on the same event, the CGT paid can be credited against the CAT liability arising provided the asset in question is not disposed of by the beneficiary within 2 years of the acquisition. This ensures that the transfer is not subject to double taxation.
There is insufficient information provided to consider whether any of the aforementioned CGT reliefs may be available in these circumstances; the scope and nature of any potential relief may only be confirmed in light of the facts and circumstances at the date of the disposal. Further guidance on the operation of CGT and associated reliefs is available on Revenue’s website at: www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/cgt-reliefs/index.aspx.
160. Deputy Patrick Costello asked the Minister for Finance when the EU's 'Right to be Forgotten' clause for cancer survivors as applied consumer credit will be placed on a legislative setting in the State. [41117/23]
View answerThe Financial Consumer Protection Roadmap, which was published by my Department on 13 September, addresses this issue in the context of the consumer protection framework available in Ireland.
A revised Consumer Credit Directive is at an advanced stage in the European legislative process. It was agreed between EU co-legislators earlier this year. The legislation will cover certain credit agreements of up to €100,000. The text is being finalised and translated before it is published in the Official Journal of the EU.
The directive enters into force on the 20th day after its publication in the Official Journal of the EU. Ireland, like other Member States, will have 2 years to adopt necessary laws and administrative provisions and 3 years to apply them.
Article 14 of the revised directive currently states:
“Member States shall require that personal data concerning consumers’ diagnoses of oncological diseases are not used for the purpose of an insurance policy related to a credit agreement after a period of time determined by the Member States, not exceeding 15 years following the end of their medical treatment.”
This means Member States should require that the insurance policies are not based on personal data concerning consumers’ diagnosis of oncological diseases health data of consumers after a relevant period of time following the end of the consumer’s medical treatment of those consumers. Such a period of time, which will be determined by each Member State during the transposition of the Directive into national law, should not exceed a period of 15 years, starting from the end of the medical treatment of the consumer.
161. Deputy Patrick Costello asked the Minister for Finance what actions he has taken to prevent discrimination by financial institutions in providing mortgage protection to individuals who have had previous illnesses, such as cancer; what options such individuals have to seek mortgage protection and a mortgage; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41118/23]
View answer185. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Minister for Finance if there are any current schemes or plans to introduce schemes to help people who, due to serious medical illness and history of same, have failed to obtain mortgages from banks and other lending institutions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41326/23]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 161 and 185 together.
The Financial Consumer Protection Roadmap, which was published by my Department on 13 September 2023, addressed this issue in the context of the consumer protections available in Ireland.
Firstly, the Deputy should note that in June of this year Insurance Ireland and its members published a Code of Practice for Underwriting Mortgage Protection Insurance for Cancer Survivors, which is expected to be operational by the end of the 2023.
Insurers will disregard a cancer diagnosis where treatment ended more than 7 years prior to application (or more than 5 years if the applicant was under 18 at the time of diagnosis). The Code will apply to mortgage cover applications of up to €500,000 for a principal private residence. Insurance Ireland estimates that this threshold covers over 90 per cent of mortgage protection policies in the market. My officials continue to engage with Insurance Ireland regarding the implementation of the Code, and will closely monitor the outcomes.
It may also interest the Deputy to know that that in order to assist clients who have had difficulty acquiring life cover due to a pre-existing illness, Brokers Ireland has published a register containing contact details of Brokers who have experience in advising on life cover in this area. This is available at: brokersireland.ie/life-cover-pre-existing-illnesses/.
The Department of Finance is also closely monitoring work by the European Commission to develop a Code of Conduct on access to financial services for cancer survivors, by early 2024. This objective is set out in ‘Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan’ which was published in 2021, and includes an initiative for 2021-2023 to “Address fair access for cancer survivors to financial services (including insurance), via a code of conduct and a reflection on long-term solutions”.
Through ‘Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan’, the Commission will closely examine practices in the area of financial services (including insurance) from the point of view of fairness towards cancer survivors in long-term remission. The Commission will engage in dialogue with businesses to develop a code of conduct to ensure that developments in cancer treatments and their improved effectiveness are reflected in the business practices of financial service providers to ensure that only necessary and proportionate information is used when assessing the eligibility of applicants for financial products, notably credit and insurance linked to credit or loan agreements.
In ‘Europe's Beating Cancer Plan: Implementation Roadmap’, the timeline for the objective “Address fair access for cancer survivors to financial services” is as follows: 2021 - Study on situation in Member States; 2022 - Stakeholder engagement, additional studies; 2023 Draft Code of conduct; 2024 Code agreed, with the Code of Conduct established in 2024.
In relation to cases where a person has been refused a mortgage by a bank or another Central Bank regulated mortgage provider, eligible borrowers, including where the applicant can provide proof of insufficient mortgage offers of finance from two regulated financial providers, can apply to the Local Authority Home Loan Scheme, which falls within the remit of the Department of Housing Local Government and Heritage.
162. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Minister for Finance to provide details of the costs to the Exchequer each year, in tabular form for the diesel rebate scheme since its inception in 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41141/23]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that the costs to the Exchequer arising from the Diesel Rebate Scheme in each of the years since its introduction in July 2013 are published on the Revenue website at: www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/tax-expenditures/costs-expenditures.aspx.
The provisional year-to-date cost in 2023 is €23.5m.
163. Deputy Neasa Hourigan asked the Minister for Finance his plans to undertake a review of the VAT classification of hairdressers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41143/23]
View answerIn relation to the VAT rate applying to hairdressers, as the Deputy will recall, I extended the 9% VAT rate which applied for the tourism, hospitality and hairdressing sectors to 31 August 2023 from the previous end date of 28 February 2023. The VAT rate reverted to the 13.5% VAT rate on 1 September 2023.
It is not intended to reintroduce this 9% reduced VAT rate at this time. As you may know, officials from my Department compiled a ministerial briefing on a number of measures, including the temporary 9% VAT rate. This briefing included an economic assessment of the measure. This considered the macroeconomic backdrop to any extension of the 9% rate, noting that the economy has rebounded strongly from the pandemic and that economic activity is now above pre-pandemic levels. The briefing also noted that the reduced rate is both regressive and very costly, and that this cost represents a transfer from taxpayers to the sectors which it covers.
The Government accepted the Department’s economic assessment, which found that there was no longer an economic case for the temporary 9% rate, and, therefore, decided upon a reversion to the 13.5% VAT rate from 1 September.
164. Deputy John Paul Phelan asked the Minister for Finance the number of individuals who paid any amount of income tax, PRSI, USC, income levy or health levy in each year from 2007 to date. [41187/23]
View answer165. Deputy John Paul Phelan asked the Minister for Finance the total receipts of each of income tax, PRSI, USC, income levy and health levy in each year from 2007 to date. [41188/23]
View answer166. Deputy John Paul Phelan asked the Minister for Finance the number of individuals who worked part-time or full-time in 2022 but who did not pay any income tax, USC or PRSI due to their level of income falling below the relevant thresholds or their tax liability being offset by their tax credits. [41190/23]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 164, 165 and 166 together.
In relation to the question regarding the number of individuals who paid any amount of income tax, PRSI, USC, income levy or health levy in each year from 2007 to date, I am advised by Revenue that such data on individuals is not available as tax liabilities are assessed on a taxpayer unit basis. A taxpayer unit can consist of two individuals in cases where a couple who are married or in a civil partnership elect to be jointly assessed. I am further advised by Revenue that the available data for analysis allows for the provision of this information in relation to income tax and USC only. On this basis, the table below provides the number of taxpayer units who had a liability to either income tax or USC (or both) in that year, for each of the years in the period 2012 to 2021 (the latest year for which such data is available). Data for the period 2007 to 2011 is not currently readily available.
|
Year |
Number of Taxpayer Units with an Income Tax and/or USC liability* |
|
2021 |
2,064,833 |
|
2020 |
2,031,946 |
|
2019 |
2,017,971 |
|
2018 |
1,873,521 |
|
2017 |
1,802,107 |
|
2016 |
1,732,172 |
|
2015 |
1,666,564 |
|
2014 |
1,660,089 |
|
2013 |
1,602,196 |
|
2012 |
1,580,988 |
*Data includes those with a liability to DIRT, which is accounted for under Income Tax.
In relation to the question regarding the total receipts of each of income tax, PRSI, USC, income levy and health levy in each year from 2007 to date, I am advised by Revenue that the breakdown of income tax, USC and income levy receipts for 2007 – 2022 is available on the Revenue website at: www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/receipts/receipts-taxhead.aspx. I am further advised that Revenue collects PRSI on behalf of the Department of Social Protection and, formerly, collected the health contribution on behalf of the Department of Health. Details on these receipts are available on the Revenue website in the archived Annual Reports at: www.revenue.ie/en/rev-100/annual-report/index.aspx?year=2000.
In relation to the question regarding the number of individuals who worked part-time or full-time in 2022 but who did not pay any income tax, USC or PRSI due to their level of income falling below the relevant thresholds or their tax liability being offset by their tax credits, I am advised by Revenue that, similar to the first question regarding the number of individuals who paid any amount of income tax, PRSI, USC, income levy or health levy in each year from 2007 to date, data on individuals is not available as tax liabilities are assessed on a taxpayer unit basis and the available data allows for analysis of those taxpayer units in relation to their income tax and USC liability only. In 2021, the latest year for which data are currently available, there was 590,277 taxpayer units who had a source of Schedule E PAYE income, but who did not have a liability to either income tax or USC. The Deputy should note that a taxpayer’s liability is calculated on the total income of the unit and that the liability refers to the liability due on the totality of their position with regards to the credits, reliefs and deductions available to and availed of by each taxpayer unit.
167. Deputy John Lahart asked the Minister for Finance his views on reports and complaints of card processing fees that have been levied by a company (details supplied) on businesses credit card accounts in the past year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41253/23]
View answer168. Deputy John Lahart asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware of reports and complaints with regard to alleged increase in credit card (merchant charges) in a nine-month period by up to 134% by a company (details supplied), which have clear and adverse consequences for the businesses concerned; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41256/23]
View answer170. Deputy John Lahart asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware of complaints and reports of increases in the cost of processing VISA commercial debit cards, the year-on-year cost of which have increased by 385% for some businesses; what action he might consider taking in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41258/23]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 167, 168 and 170 together.
The merchant service charge is the fee charged by an acquirer to a business for processing card transactions. The acquirer referred to by the Deputy and its competitors are independent commercial entities operating in an a competitive market. The amount of the merchant service charge varies by acquirer, often depending on the volume of card transactions the retailer accepts.
One aspect of the merchant service charge is the interchange fee, which is charged by card issuing banks to businesses for accepting card payments. Since 2015, interchange fees on consumer debit and credit cards have been capped. Under the Interchange Fee Regulation, Ireland set the maximum interchange fee at 0.1% of the value of transactions for domestic consumer debit cards and 0.3% of the value of transactions for consumer credit cards. However, the Interchange Fee Regulation does not cover commercial debit and credit cards.
There is no domestic card payment scheme and Irish card payments are primarily facilitated by international card payment schemes such as VISA and MasterCard. The Central Bank seeks independently verified transaction and fee information from international card schemes operating in Ireland to ensure that they are operating in compliance with the Interchange Fee Regulations.
While regulated entities must comply with the rules regarding interchange fees, the merchant service charge is a commercial decision for each service provider. Acquiring services is a competitive market and businesses in general, and smaller businesses in particular, could stand to benefit from lower rates by switching provider.
169. Deputy John Lahart asked the Minister for Finance if he has any plans to make changes to the rent-a-room scheme with regard to taxable income (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41257/23]
View answerThe Rent a Room scheme was introduced in Finance Act 2001 as an incentive to encourage individuals to let rooms in their principal private residence as residential accommodation in order to bring about an increase in the availability of rental accommodation. In accordance with section 216A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, an individual who lets a room or rooms in her or his sole or main residence as residential accommodation may be exempt from income tax, PRSI and USC in respect of income from the letting where the aggregate of the gross rents and any sums for meals or other services supplied with the letting does not exceed the threshold for the year in question, which is €14,000 for 2023. Although the relief applies automatically, the amount of exempt rental income must be included in the individual’s tax return for the year in question.
The upper income threshold of €14,000 would allow an individual to receive income of up to €1,166.66 per month over a 12 month period under the scheme, without it giving rise to a tax liability.
The following table sets out data on the number of taxpayer units availing of the scheme, together with the Exchequer cost of the relief for the years 2016 - 2021 (the latest year for which data are available).
|
Year |
Exchequer Cost €m |
Number of taxpayer units |
|
2021 |
26.8 |
10,730 |
|
2020 |
20.7 |
9,310 |
|
2019 |
22.2 |
9,810 |
|
2018 |
19.7 |
9,240 |
|
2017 |
12.0 |
8,160 |
|
2016 |
9.3 |
7,350 |
While there was a reduction in the number of claimants in 2020, which may have been as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, 2021 data indicated a return to the growth trend in numbers claiming the relief.
As the Deputy will appreciate, decisions regarding tax incentives and reliefs are normally made in the context of the annual Budget and Finance Bill process. Such decisions must have regard to the sound management of the public finances and my Department's Tax Expenditure Guidelines. These guidelines make clear that any policy proposal which involves tax expenditures should only occur in limited circumstances where there are demonstrable market failures, where a tax-based incentive is more efficient than a direct expenditure intervention.
Furthermore, it is a longstanding practice of the Minister for Finance not to comment, in advance of the Budget, on any matters that might be the subject of Budget decisions.
171. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Finance his views on the National Risk Assessment published in July 2023 by the Department of An Taoiseach which identified that there needs to be a phased withdrawal of substantial resources allocated to the war in Ukraine, Brexit and the cost of living, which is essential to ensuring Ireland’s public finances remain sustainable into the future (details supplied); the total amount allocated to each of these supports for the years 2022 and 2023; the estimated cost for each in Budget 2024; and if he will provide the total cost, per Ireland’s GDP, in financial supports to Ukraine for 2022 and 2023, ranking in order of each OECD country, by GDP. [41265/23]
View answerThe challenges of the last several years have necessitated significant fiscal intervention by Government, both through taxation policy measures and temporary or non-core expenditure. As I have stated on many occasions, fiscal policy must strike a balance between providing Government with the scope to act as necessary today and ensuring the sustainability of our public finances over the medium term.
Expenditure allocations are a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform. However, I am advised that approximately €1 billion was spent in 2022 to provide humanitarian support in respect of Ukrainian refugees and that in the first half of 2023 over €1 billion further has been spent. As outlined in the Summer Economic Statement 2023, a contingency provision of €2.0 billion this year and €2.5 billion next year has been made for expenditure related to Ukrainian refugees. The latest available information will be reviewed as part of Budget 2024 and will be taken into account in funding allocations.
Ireland has been allocated over €1 billion under the Brexit Adjustment Reserve (BAR) to mitigate the effects of Brexit. Government has allocated BAR funding for a range of measures in 2022 and 2023, and is also engaging in a process of identifying Brexit-related expenditure during 2020 and 2021. Only eligible expenditure will qualify for funding under the BAR. As such, the precise composition of Ireland's BAR claim will not be finalised until the claim is submitted in September 2024.
In response to the cost of living challenge, Government has, across 2022 and 2023, made available some €12 billion in direct support, with a focus on temporary, timely measures targeted at those most vulnerable.
As the Deputy will appreciate, it would not be appropriate for me to speculate on potential measures that will be subject to decision as part of the budgetary process.
Finally, the Deputy has requested information on Ireland's financial support provided to Ukraine. I am advised by my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, that international comparison data is not readily available. However, I am advised that the most recent available estimate is that Ireland has provided over €0.2 billion to Ukraine, primarily via the European Peace Facility.
172. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Minister for Finance to respond to concerns and proposals from a person (details supplied) in respect of the exclusion of permanent fillings on root canals from the MED2 process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41267/23]
View answerSection 469 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (TCA 1997) provides for tax relief where an individual proves that he or she has incurred costs in respect of qualifying health expenses.
Only “health expenses” incurred in the provision of “health care”, which has been carried out or advised by (in certain circumstances) a “practitioner”, will qualify for tax relief.
Health expenses are defined as “expenses in respect of the provision of health care” and may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• the services of a practitioner,
• diagnostic procedures carried out on the advice of a practitioner,
• maintenance or treatment necessarily incurred in connection with the services of a practitioner or diagnostic procedures carried out on the advice of a practitioner, and
• drugs or medicines supplied on the prescription of a practitioner.
A practitioner is a person who is:
• registered in the register established under section 43 of the Medical Practitioners Act 2007,
• registered in the register established under section 26 of the Dentists Act 1985, or
• in relation to health care provided outside the State, entitled under the laws of the country in which the care is provided to practice medicine or dentistry there.
Health care is defined as the “prevention, diagnosis, alleviation or treatment of an ailment, injury, infirmity, defect or disability”.
Excluded from the definition (i.e. meaning that tax relief is not available), amongst other treatments, is “routine dental treatment”. Revenue has no discretion in relation to the items excluded from the relief, as the meaning of routine dental treatment is defined within section 439(1) TCA 1997 as “the extraction, scaling and filling of teeth and the provision and repairing of artificial teeth or dentures ”.
These “routine dental treatment” items are excluded from relief even if there is an underlying medical condition that gives rise to the dental treatment. These defined items are excluded also where the treatment in a particular case is considered to be of a non-routine nature, for example, if of a non-routine orthodontic nature, involving the extraction of a tooth as part of that treatment, relief would be allowed for the cost of the orthodontic treatment excluding the cost of the extraction.
The rationale behind income tax relief for health expenses is broadly intended to provide assistance for those expenses of a significant or exceptional nature. The exclusion of expenses incurred in respect of routine dental treatment has been in place since the relief’s inception in 1967 and I am satisfied that the legislation as drafted and implemented provides sufficient flexibility for expenses that should qualify. There are no plans to change these arrangements at this time.
In this regard, I note that tax relief for medical expenses is a commonly availed of relief – the most recent data (from 2021) highlights that (excluding nursing home fees) 567,900 taxpayer units availed of the relief at an Exchequer cost of €172 million. If routine dental expenses, were tax relieved, it would inevitably lead to calls for other treatments to similarly qualify for relief. This could greatly increase the overall cost of the tax relief.
However, the Deputy will be aware that in recent years there has been an increase in the level of dental benefits available through the social insurance system administered by the Department of Social Protection. In this regard, it is noted that tax relief is only of assistance to individuals who have sufficient tax liability and so direct expenditure may be a more effective way of targeting assistance to those who may need a specific support.
In relation to the Deputy’s request regarding consolidation of the Taxes Consolidation Act, I would note that the Commission on Taxation and Welfare also made this recommendation. However, the Commission’s Report recognised that this would represent a large undertaking and would require significant resources to be allocated to the Department of Finance, the Revenue Commissioners and the Office of the Parliamentary Council. I would further note that it is clearly set out in the Commission’s report that the recommendations are not intended to be implemented all at once, but rather provide a clear direction of travel for this and future Governments.
In respect of resources currently available to the general public by which they can track the evolution of the law, the Office of the Attorney General provides the electronic Irish Statute Book, an online database which includes Acts of the Oireachtas and Statutory Instruments. This website allows members of the public to track amendments to and commencements of legislation, access the Constitution and a selection of pre-1922 legislation while also providing links to external legislation resources.
174. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Finance if he will clarify who in the State is responsible for assessing the performance of the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman with respect to Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for consumer disputes (the ADR Directive). [41298/23]
View answerDirective 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (“The ADR Directive”) concerns alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for consumer disputes and amends Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC. Article 55 of the ADR Directive provides that:
“In order to ensure that ADR entities function properly and effectively, they should be closely monitored. For that purpose, each Member States should designate a competent authority or competent authorities which should perform that function. …”
In Ireland, S.I. No. 343/2015 designates the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (“CCPC”) as the competent authority for this purpose.
