Written Answers Nos. 207-221
207. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Finance his plans to prevent us becoming a cashless society when it comes to taking money in outlets; his views on same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7486/24]
View answerYou will be aware that the Retail Banking Review, published in November 2022, made two clear recommendations regarding payments: (1) for my Department to develop Access to Cash legislation and prepare a related Heads of a Bill in 2023; and (2) for my Department to lead on the development of a National Payments Strategy (NPS) in 2024.
I published the terms of reference for the NPS in June 2023, and work on the NPS has commenced, taking account of the changing payment landscape and ongoing legislative developments at EU level, including proposals on instant payments, payment services, legal tender and the digital euro.
My Department sought views from across Irish society though a public consultation that closed on 14 February. The Consultation Paper on the NPS was prepared to guide the discussion and is available on the Department’s website, consult.finance.gov.ie/en. The responses to the public consultation will form an important part of the NPS to be published in 2024.
The Consultation Paper has three main areas of focus:
• Payments roadmap
• Acceptance of cash
• Access to cash [the development of the access to cash legislation is a separate work stream]
Focusing on the question posed in relation acceptance of cash, there is a need to ensure that cash can be accepted as a means of payment where appropriate. The NPS work will, therefore, look at the acceptance of cash and consider if legislation should be introduced to require certain sectors or sub-sectors to accept or facilitate the acceptance of cash. By extension, it will have to be considered whether it should be policy of the Government to require the public service to accept or facilitate the acceptance of cash.
In September 2023, I recommended a pause in any changes to the acceptance of cash by public bodies until the NPS is finalised in 2024. That is to say public bodies should continue to accept cash where they currently do so and not remove this option as they may be subsequently required to revert back to accepting, or facilitating the acceptance of cash.
Additionally, on 28 June 2023, the European Commission published a proposal for a Regulation on Legal Tender, which looks at both access to and acceptance of cash.
As regards the acceptance of cash, the European Commission's draft regulation proposes that cash acceptance should be mandatory across the Euro Area.
The draft Regulation proposes that the competent authority in each Member State would be required to monitor the acceptance of payments in cash on an annual basis against a set of common indicators to be formulated by the European Commission and to take remedial measures if this monitoring shows that the mandatory acceptance of cash is being undermined. The draft Regulation specifically draws attention to the need to monitor the level of 'ex ante unilateral exclusions of payments in cash'. It defines such exclusions as including a 'no cash' sign.
The recitals to the proposed Regulation state that a Member State should, if it concludes the level of unilateral exclusions of cash undermine the mandatory acceptance of euro banknotes and coin, take effective and proportionate measures including requiring specific sectors, such as healthcare, supermarkets, post offices and pharmacies, to accept cash. The NPS will be informed by this.
208. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide a schedule of NAMA owned and or controlled assets that are currently being used by the Department of Children and Youth Affairs. [7494/24]
View answerI wish to advise the Deputy that NAMA does not typically own or control properties; rather NAMA owns loans for which the properties act as security.
The properties securing NAMA’s loans are owned and controlled by their registered owners or appointed receivers in the case of enforcement. By virtue of Sections 99 and 202 of the NAMA Act, NAMA is legally precluded from disclosing confidential debtor information, including specific details relating to secured assets.
NAMA has confirmed that the Agency currently has no engagement with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth in relation to any of its secured assets. I am further advised by NAMA that its secured portfolio contains very few residential assets that are let and none that are available for letting.
209. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Finance the number of successful claims under the help to-buy scheme per annum per local authority area for each year since its inception; if the number of unsuccessful applications per local authority area will also be provided; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7543/24]
View answerThe Help to Buy scheme (HTB) assists first-time buyers with the deposit required to purchase or self-build a new house or apartment to live in as their home providing for a refund of Income Tax and Deposit Interest Retention Tax (DIRT) paid by the applicant(s) over the previous four tax years. Eligibility of the applicant, together with the maximum potential relief available is determined at application stage, however, eligibility of the residence and actual relief due is confirmed at claim/verification stage.
It should be noted that applications for HTB may be made on a provisional basis as first-time buyers seek to clarify their entitlements in advance of commencing the purchase of a property. An application will only progress to the “claim” stage if and when the applicant decides to purchase a property that is eligible for the scheme. First-time buyers can submit their claim once a contract is signed for the purchase of a property. In the case of self-builds, the claim can be submitted after the draw-down of the first tranche of the mortgage.
I am advised by Revenue that annual statistics on the Help to Buy (HTB) scheme are available on the Revenue website at www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/tax-expenditures/htb/htb-yearly.aspx.
Revenue’s 2023 Annual HTB Report will shortly be available at this location.
In addition to this, monthly statistics are also available on the Revenue website at www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/tax-expenditures/htb/htb-monthly.aspx
I am further advised that, while HTB claimants are required to give details of the county in which the relevant property is located, they are not required to declare the specific local authority area. Therefore, Revenue does not have data from which to provide a breakdown by local authority area.
However, the statistics published on the Revenue website provide a county breakdown of HTB claims. As the county information is only captured once an application moves from application stage to claim stage, it is not possible to provide a county breakdown of applications that did not proceed to claim stage.
Applications that do not meet eligibility criteria, and, as a result, do not proceed to application approval stage, are not recorded on Revenue systems. The Deputy may also wish to note that applicants may apply and subsequently cancel their application multiple times in order to correct the application, for example, when amending from a single to joint application or including additional or fewer years. Furthermore, approved applications will automatically expire if the claim is not finalised on or before 31 December, for applications received between 1 January and 30 September, and on 31 March of the following year, for applications received between 1 October and 31 December.
210. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware that loan owners (vulture funds) are not subject to the provisions of the Consumer Protection (Regulation of Credit Servicing Firms) Act 2018 where they confer legal title of the loan to the credit servicing firms but retain beneficial ownership; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7563/24]
View answer211. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware that loan owners (vulture funds) are not required to be regulated when they maintain beneficial ownership of a loan but have conferred legal title of the loan to the credit servicing firms; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7564/24]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 210 and 211 together.
The Consumer Protection (Regulation of Credit Servicing Firms) Act 2015 made the activity of credit servicing a regulated activity and, as such, within the regulatory mandate of the Central Bank. Credit servicing includes the management and administration of credit agreements. Because credit servicing is a regulated activity, the consumer protection regulatory framework applies to the regulated firm and the relevant credit agreements serviced by these firms.
The 2015 Act also provided that any person who holds the legal title to credit granted under a credit agreement with a relevant borrower, and in respect of which credit servicing is not being undertaken by a person authorised to carry on credit servicing, also has to be regulated as a credit servicing firm.
Under the Consumer Protection (Regulation of Credit Servicing Firms) Act 2018, which came into effect in 2019, the activity of holding the legal title to credit granted under a relevant credit agreement and associated ownership activities also became credit servicing and accordingly a regulated activity.
As such, the consumer protection regulatory framework also applies to these firms from that date. The 2018 Act means that the Central Bank now also regulates the person who either holds legal title to a loan or has material rights to decide how a portfolio of loans is dealt with.
Also, under the 2018 Act, the determination of the overall strategy for the management and administration of a portfolio of credit agreements and the maintenance of control over key decisions relating to such a portfolio also became a credit servicing activity subject to regulation.
While credit servicing and holding the legal title to credit is a regulated activity, beneficial ownership – in and of itself - is not a regulated activity. Firms that are beneficial owners of credit agreements are therefore not within the regulatory remit of the Central Bank. However, because credit agreements held by beneficial owners also have a legal title owner and/or a credit servicer which are regulated, the credit agreements and borrowers are in scope of the overall consumer protection framework in place.
Where a fund acquires beneficial ownership but not legal ownership of a loan, they are generally entitled to income from the loan, but legal ownership and responsibility reside with the legal loan owner. The legal owner remains regulated and responsible for steps they take in respect of the loan and do not escape that responsibility because another entity retains beneficial ownership, or the right to income from the loan.
The overall consumer protection framework in place applies to legal title ownership and credit servicing activities, including determination of strategy and control of key decisions. Where a loan is sold or transferred, the protections that were available to borrowers prior to the transaction apply under the regulatory framework as set out above.
The consumer protection framework includes the Consumer Protection Code 2012, Code of Conduct for Mortgage Arrears 2013, Code of Conduct for Business Lending to Small & Medium Enterprises 2012 and Fitness and Probity Standards (including minimum competency requirements).
212. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of complaints made against loan owners to the FSPO which were not investigated on the grounds of the conduct occurring prior to January 2019, with respect to complaints in each of the years 2013 to 2023 [7565/24]
View answer213. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of complaints made against credit servicing firms to the FSPO which were not investigated on the grounds that the conduct complained of was with respect to “maintenance of control over key decisions” and, as such, the appropriate entity was the loan owner and not the credit servicing firm, with the conduct occurring prior to January 2019, with respect to complaints in each of the years 2013 to 2023. [7566/24]
View answer214. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of complaints made against credit servicing firms to the FSPO which were not investigated on the grounds of the conduct occurring prior to 8 July 2015, with respect to complaints in each of the years 2013 to 2023. [7567/24]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 212 to 214, inclusive, together.
The Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) plays a vital role for consumers of financial services in Ireland, as part of a robust financial consumer protection framework.
The statutory functions of the FSPO are set out in the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017. This governing legislation empowers the FSPO to investigate individual complaints made by consumers (including small businesses) about the conduct of regulated financial service providers. The FSPO has no jurisdiction to investigate complaints about the conduct of financial service providers that are not authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland.
The Consumer Protection (Regulation of Credit Servicing Firms) Act 2015 introduced a new regulatory regime for “credit servicing firms”, which were considered new entity types by the Central Bank of Ireland.
When a complaint is received, it is reviewed by FSPO staff to determine the identity of the provider that is responsible for the conduct which is the subject of the complaint. In circumstances where the date of conduct occurred prior to 8 July 2015, the FSPO conducts a review to assess whether the financial service provider was authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland at the time of the conduct giving rise to the complaint.
• If the provider was authorised, the FSPO deems that the complaint can be maintained and can progress through the FSPO’s complaint resolution process.
• If the provider was not authorised, the FSPO deems that the complaint is not eligible, as it does not fall within the jurisdiction of the FSPO, pursuant to the 2017 Act.
In 2018, the Consumer Protection (Regulation of Credit Servicing Firms) Act 2018 further expanded the definition of credit servicing to include ownership of legal title to credit granted under a credit agreement, as well as other activities associated with ownership of legal title. On the basis of the 2018 Act, an entity purchasing a loan (and legal title), is now required to be authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland.
When a complaint is received against the background of a sale to an entity that was previously unregulated, but is now regulated as a consequence of the 2018 Act, it is reviewed by FSPO staff to determine the identity of the provider that is responsible for the conduct which is the subject of the complaint, to establish:
• whether the owner of the loan was authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland at the time of the conduct complained of, and if so, the complaint is noted to come within the jurisdiction of the FSPO and can be investigated.
• If the conduct complained of took place before the loan owner became authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland as a consequence of the 2018 Act, only such element of the complaint as concerns the credit servicing of the loan, by the credit servicing firm, can be progressed by way of a FSPO investigation, i.e. where the conduct complained of relates to “managing and administering” a credit agreement as defined in the 2015 Act.
I am currently seeking legal advice to ensure clarity on the scope of the FSPO's jurisdiction, with the aim of ensuring access to the FSPO as an important part of a robust consumer protection framework.
I have always advocated for the broadest regulatory and consumer protection regime possible, including access to the FSPO, and I have made clear that I am willing to introduce further legislative amendments should that be necessary and possible.
My officials are engaging as a matter of priority with the FSPO and the Central Bank on the issues raised, and to obtain the necessary legal advice.
The FSPO informs me that the data sought by the Deputy in respect to complaints in each of the years 2013 to 2023 is not readily available, because of the way in which the FSPO collects complaint data.
In some instances, even though one element of complaint cannot proceed to investigation, the complaint file nevertheless remains open and active because another element of complaint is being progressed by the FSPO.
However, the FSPO has undertaken a manual exercise, to provide some insight on the volume of identifiable complaints where a consumer in the period from July 2015 – December 2019, was unable to progress a complaint through this Office, within the following parameters:
• The file was closed by the Financial Services Ombudsman Bureau/FSPO over that period,
• The complaint was made about the conduct of a credit servicing firm, or an SPV/Non-Bank Loan Owner, or the provider was not recorded on the FSPO system (which happens when the provider is not regulated), and
• The closure was noted as a jurisdictional reason concerning the provider (as distinct from the eligibility of the complainant) or the closure reason was categorised as a time limit issue
In the context of almost 20,000 file closures over that period, and within those parameters, the FSPO identified 101 complaints for manual review and having undertaken that review, 42 complaint files were noted to have closed for reasons including but not limited to the conduct complained of having taken place at a time that the relevant provider was not regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland.
The FSPO continues to review the data for the rest of the period indicated, i.e. 2020-2023, but owing to the time constraints for the response, this is not yet available.
215. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Finance if he will request that ISIF withdraws its investment in firms based in illegal Israeli settlements; if he will provide details of the engagement, if any, he and his officials have had with ISIF; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7691/24]
View answerThe NTMA inform me that the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund (ISIF) constructs its portfolio within the legislative framework set for it by the Oireachtas and will align it with any changes it makes. ISIF endeavours to be a responsible investor, actively integrating ESG factors into its decision-making processes with a view to enhancing the overall outcomes for the Fund and ultimately its beneficial owner.
ISIF has, to date, completed several divestment programmes and excluded investments from the Fund, consistent with legislative changes enacted by the Oireachtas which have had a consequential impact on ISIF’s investment strategy. In this context ISIF operates an exclusion policy which is consistent with its statutory mandate, as amended from time to time. Exclusion is used on a limited basis, reflecting exclusions mandated by legislation (such as the Fossil Fuel Divestment Act 2018 or the Cluster Munitions and Anti-Personnel Mines Act 2008).
Exclusions are also made on sustainable investment grounds using ISIF’s Exclusion Decision Making Framework including in respect of Tobacco and Nuclear Weapons.
As a body under my aegis my officials routinely engage with the NTMA, including ISIF, on a range of matters, as required.
216. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Finance to advise under the bilateral agreement between Ireland and the United States, if a U.S. citizen living in Ireland who is paying taxes in the U.S on a social security disability and Union pension is expected to also pay taxes in Ireland, and therefore pay taxes in both countries; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7692/24]
View answerI understand that the query relates to the Irish tax treatment of both a US social security disability pension and a US occupational pension and the treatment of both under the Ireland-US Double Taxation Treaty (“DTT”). From the information provided, both the social security disability pension and a US occupational pension are subject to tax in the USA.
I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that Section 200 of the Taxes Consolidation Act (TCA) 1997 provides for a tax exemption for certain foreign pensions, but based on the information provided (i.e., that both pensions are subject to tax in the USA), the exemptions in section 200 would not apply.
Under general charging rules in Ireland, the extent to which the taxpayer is liable to pay tax on his/her US-sourced income depends on his/her residence and domicile position for Irish tax purposes. An individual who is resident and domiciled for Irish tax purposes is liable to Irish income tax on their worldwide income. An individual who is resident, but not domiciled, for Irish tax purposes is liable to Irish income tax on Irish-sourced income, but a liability to tax will only arise on their foreign-sourced income only to the extent that this income is remitted to the State. This is known as the remittance basis of taxation.
Further information regarding the above is available at the following link:
www.revenue.ie/en/jobs-and-pensions/tax-residence/index.aspx
Therefore, the extent to which the payments are chargeable to Irish income tax depends on the residence and domicile position of the taxpayer and subject to the applicable provisions of a double tax agreement where applicable.
Ireland-US DTT
The taxpayer may be able to claim relief from double taxation under the Ireland-US DTT in respect of the two pension payments that have been subject to tax in both jurisdictions.
With respect to the US private occupational pension, Article 18(1)(a) of the DTT provides that pensions and other similar remuneration derived and beneficially owned by a resident of a Contracting State (in this case, the USA) in consideration of past employment are taxable only in the State of residence (in this case, Ireland) of the beneficiary. If this treatment applies to the US private occupational pension, then the DTT provides that it is taxable only in Ireland. However, this paragraph is subject to the US ‘saving clause’ in Article 1(4), meaning that the US may tax a pension received by an Irish resident individual who is also a US citizen.
With respect to the US social security disability pension, Article 18(1)(b) of the DTT provides that payments made by one of the Contracting States (in this case the USA) under the provisions of its social security or similar legislation to a resident of the other Contracting State (in this case Ireland) will be taxable only in the other Contracting State, i.e., in Ireland. This income is, by virtue of Article 1(5), not subject to the US ‘savings clause’. In the circumstances, if this treatment applies to the US social security disability pension, then the DTT provides that it is taxable only in Ireland.
In both cases, where double taxation arises, the provisions of Article 24 on relief from double taxation will apply.
Without further specifics, the foregoing is a general overview of the position based on the information provided.
217. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Finance if he will urgently review the thresholds for capital gains tax; if he agrees that it is unfair to have a different threshold for non-relatives, particularly in the case where it affects the child of a partner or ex-partner; and given the recent High Court case involving a widow's pension payment, if he agrees that this issue needs to be re-examined. [7707/24]
View answer218. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Finance if he will review the issue of capital gains tax in a case (details supplied). [7710/24]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 217 and 218 together.
In respect of both of these questions, I assume the Deputy is referring to Capital Acquisitions Tax (CAT), which is a tax on gifts and inheritances payable by the beneficiary of that gift or inheritance.
In relation to the CAT thresholds, I am advised by Revenue that it is the relationship between the person providing a gift or inheritance (the disponer) and the person receiving the benefit (the beneficiary) that determines the tax-free threshold (Group threshold) below which CAT does not arise. Any prior gift or inheritance received by a person since 5 December 1991 from within the same Group threshold is aggregated for the purposes of determining whether any CAT 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. There are three Group thresholds:
• the Group A threshold (currently €335,000) applies, inter alia, where the beneficiary is a child of the disponer;
• the Group B threshold (currently €32,500) applies where the beneficiary is a brother, sister, nephew, niece or lineal ancestor or lineal descendant of the disponer;
• the Group C threshold (currently €16,250) applies in all other cases.
Notwithstanding the application of the Group thresholds, the Capital Acquisitions Tax Consolidation Act 2003 (CATCA 2003) provides for a number of reliefs and exemptions from CAT. Most of these are not contingent on a particular family relationship existing between the disponer and beneficiary. For example, reliefs are available in relation to gifts and inheritances of agricultural property and certain business property where certain conditions are met.
In relation to the issue of CAT in the case referred to by the Deputy, I am further advised by Revenue that CATCA 2003 makes provision for the Group A threshold to be extended in certain circumstances.
This may include the specific circumstances referred to by the Deputy, which is where the beneficiary of property, while not related to the disponer, was in his care for many years. Given that the disponer and beneficiary are not related, the Group C threshold would ordinarily apply in such circumstances.
However, CATCA 2003 makes provision for the beneficiary of a gift or an inheritance, on making a claim to Revenue, to avail of the Group A threshold in relation to that gift or inheritance in circumstances where the beneficiary, while under the age of 18:
• resided with the disponer for at least 5 years in total, and
• was maintained and cared for by the disponer at the disponer’s expense.
Where these conditions are met, the Group A threshold will apply for the purposes of determining the CAT due, if any, on the gift or inheritance. This relief is generally referred to as “foster child relief”, however, it is not necessary for a formal fostering arrangement to be in place for the relief to apply.
Further information on foster child relief is available on the Revenue website at www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/cat-reliefs/foster-child-relief/taken-from-foster-parent.aspx.
In relation to the details provided of the specific case, it is not possible to provide a definitive answer. However, as per above, the person who is gifted the property could be entitled to the Group A Threshold in certain circumstances. If the person the Deputy refers to has further queries, they can contact Revenue using the MyEnquiries facility in myAccount or contact the National Capital Acquisitions Tax (CAT) Unit at 01 738 3673.
219. Deputy Verona Murphy asked the Minister for Finance if his Department will initiate a full review of the medical criteria for a primary medical certificate as set out by the Department regulations; if he considers it reasonable to broaden the criteria to include single arm or hand amputee applicants to the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7757/24]
View answerThe Deputy will be aware that the final report of the National Disability Inclusion Strategy (NDIS) Transport Working Group's review of mobility and transport supports including the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passenger’s Scheme (DDS), endorsed proposals for a modern, fit-for-purpose vehicle adaptation scheme in line with international best practice that would replace the DDS.
The Working Group was chaired by Minister Anne Rabbitte and led by the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (DCEDIY).
Access to transport for people with disabilities is a multifaceted issue that involves work carried out by multiple Government departments and agencies. Consequently under the aegis of the Department of Taoiseach officials from relevant Departments and agencies are meeting to discuss the issues arising from the NDIS report and to map a way forward.
My officials are proactively engaging with this Senior Officials Group's (SOG) work as an important step in considering ways to replace the DDS, as one specific personal transport response, in the context of broader Government consideration of holistic, multifaceted and integrated transport and mobility supports for those with a disability. Three meetings of the group have been held, in July, November and December 2023.
The Department of Finance has recently submitted a note to the group with my approval in mid-January 2024. This note outlines a proposal for a replacement scheme for the DDS which would be a needs-based, grant-led approach for necessary vehicle adaptations that could serve to improve the functional mobility of the individual. This proposal is in line with what the NDIS Transport Working Group Report endorsed.
It is expected that this note will be considered by the SOG at a forthcoming meeting of the group. In that context, the Deputy should note that any further changes to the existing DDS would run counter to NDIS proposals to entirely replace the scheme with a modern, fit-for-purpose vehicular adaptation scheme.
Finally the Deputy should be aware that while my Department has oversight of the DDS, it does not have responsibility for disability policy, so any decision to put in place a new scheme to replace it will be a matter for Government.
220. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 104 of 7 February 2024, the return on investment and internal rate of return for each investment in each year of its existence, compared to the ISIF's annual benchmark, that is, the average cost of Irish Government debt, in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7815/24]
View answerThe NTMA have informed me that the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund (ISIF) is a commercial investor in a range of businesses, platforms and projects which support the delivery of new homes in Ireland. These investments are in private market commercial operations, typically featuring a significant quantum of third-party investment that deliver a range of housing tenures including Purpose-Built Student Accommodation. As such, it is not possible to provide the return on investment or internal rate of return for each of these investments by year as requested by the Deputy.
221. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Finance the estimated full year cost if the blind person tax credit increased to €1,950 for a single person and €3,900 for married couples or civil partners. [7835/24]
View answerBased on Revenue’s latest Ready Reckoner (post-Budget 2024), the estimated cost to the Exchequer of increasing the blind person’s tax credit from €1,650 to €1,950 per annum for a single person and from €3,300 to €3,900 per annum for married couples or civil partners, is approximately €0.3 million on a first year basis and €0.4 million on a full year basis.
I would draw the Deputy's attention to the fact that the post-Budget 2024 Ready Reckoner is available on the Revenue Statistics webpage at:
www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/ready-reckoner/index.aspx
The Ready Reckoner provides estimated costs and yields arising from changes to a wide range of taxes and duties, Amounts other than those shown in the Ready Reckoner can be extrapolated using a straight line or pro-rata calculation.
