Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 23 Nov 1993

Vol. 436 No. 1

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Farmers' Taxation.

Proinsias De Rossa

Ceist:

9 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Finance if he has satisfied himself with the level of tax returns from the farming community in view of the fact that, while the average tax take from PAYE workers increased by 17 per cent between 1989 and 1992, the average tax paid by farmers decreased by 9 per cent during the same period and that average tax paid by farmers is now less than one fifth of that paid by PAYE workers; the steps, if any, he intends to take to ensure a fairer tax return from the farming sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

In a reply to a parliamentary question from Deputy De Rossa on 7 October last, I gave details of statistics of the average income tax payments by PAYE workers, farmers and the self-employed. I presume it is these statistics to which the Deputy is referring.

It should be noted that the figures given in reply to that parliamentary question gave the tax take in respect of farming profits. It did not include PAYE tax paid on employment income earned by farmers or their spouses. Such tax is included in the overall collection of PAYE and is not distinguishable until after the income tax returns submitted by farmers have been analysed. An analysis of the returns for the income tax year 1990-91, the latest available, indicates that some £33 million in tax was paid by farmers, including trader-farmers, or their spouses, under the PAYE system for that year.

The reduction in income tax yield on farming profits since 1989 is mainly attributable to a fall in farm incomes in two years in succession, 1990 and 1991. A recovery in farm profits only became evident in 1992. This is borne out in revised figures published by the Central Statistics Office in late July of this year for income from self-employment and other trading income of the agricultural sector. The current estimates of the CSO are for a fall of 1.6 per cent in 1990 profits as compared with the corresponding 1989 earnings, a further fall in 1991 over 1990 of 8.9 per cent and a recovery in 1992 over 1991 of 19 per cent. This recovery is reflected in the increase in farmers' taxation in 1992 over 1991.

However, the income tax yield of £36 million in 1991 included a fall of approximately £5 million due to the deferral of the balances of 1990-91 tax from 1991 to 1992 as a transitional effect of introducing the current year basis of assessment for self-employed persons in 1990. This amount was included in the yield of £48 million for 1992. When the distorting effect of the 1990-91 balances is excluded for comparative purposes, the average yield per capita from farmers' taxation in 1992 increased by about 18 per cent over the 1991 average.

With regard to steps taken to ensure a fair tax return from the farming sector, in common with other self-employed taxpayers, farmers are subject to the various compliance and audit arrangements which apply under the self-assessment system. As from 1992 a percentage of new cases selected for audit are chosen on a random basis. Revenue audit activity increased in 1992 and was further intensified in 1993 with a significant increase in staff and a reorganisation of audit activity in tax offices.

I thank the Minister for his reply. The figures referred to in Deputy De Rossa's question are the figures given to the House by the Minister on the last occasion this issue was raised. We cannot continue to accept a situation where the amount paid by the PAYE worker is five times more than the average amount paid by a farmer. I accept that some farmers are on low incomes, but we are talking about average figures which have been compiled by the Minister's Department. The Minister said that the tax take from workers increased by 17 per cent between 1989 and 1992 while the tax take from farmers decreased by 19 per cent during the same period. Does the Minister intend to take any additional measures to introduce greater equity into the tax code, thus eliminating the disparity between what is paid by the farming community on the one hand and what is paid by PAYE workers on the other?

The situation in regard to small business people is similar. There has to be equity in the system. We have endeavoured to promote the farm profile scheme with the co-operation of the farming organisations. We made it a priority both last year and this year to ensure that the self-assessment system was working properly. Some difficulties still exist in terms of properly operating the PRSI and RSI aspects of the system, which will come into effect early in the new year, in the agricultural sector. The self-assessment system is now operating more effectively.

The same principle of self-assessment applies to farmers — a person earning a certain income has to pay tax. The self-assessment system is crucial in terms of compiling data on the number of farmers who should be paying tax. I gave data to Deputy De Rossa on the last occasion he raised this question and I am glad of the opportunity today to clarify the position and give the full figures so that there can be no argument about them. The Deputy is making the point that the average figure for farmers is still much lower than it should be. In 1992 — I do not have the full data for 1993 — the number of farmers assessed for tax was approximately 69,000 and the number liable for tax was 27,000. The Deputy referred to the average figures I gave on the last occasion. The estimated amount which will be paid by farmers in PRSI in 1993 is £13 million. This figure is still rather low. Both the Revenue Commissioners and I, as Minister for Finance, have to ensure that the system is enforced in such a way that it is fair to all categories of self-employed people, including farmers.

Reference has been made recently to alleged pay increases in the public and private sectors. Does the Minister understand the plight of the average PAYE worker who pays five times as much tax as farmers and who has heard announcements by the Government of a 15 per cent increase in incomes for farmers last year and a projected increase of 20 per cent in their incomes for this year? Has the Minister read the speech last week by the Governor of the Central Bank, a speech which has attracted much attention for the remarks on one page? Did he read the section of Mr. Doyle's speech relating to tax reform and his belief that the tax wedge cannot be tackled unless the burden of taxation is spread and the base is broadened? He specifically singled out farmers for not paying their fair share of tax. What is the Minister's response to that speech?

The Deputy has referred to increases in farmers' incomes. The current estimates of the CSO in regard to the farming community, which are not relevant to other sections of the community, are for a decrease of 1.6 per cent in 1990 profits as compared with the corresponding 1989 earnings, a further decrease in 1991 over 1990 of 8.9 per cent and a recovery in 1992 over 1991 of 19 per cent. We have to take into account the decreases as well as the increases.

The Minister's heart is not in this issue. He knows well that his constituents do not believe a word of it.

The Minister does not have too many farmers in his constituency.

My comments——

(Interruptions.)

The Minister without interruption, please.

With regard to the speech by the Governor of the Central Bank, I have read the full report, which I found very interesting. I agree totally with the view that if one is to achieve tax reform the base has to be broadened. Some Members of this House think that tax reform is all about reductions in tax.

The Minister has been indoctrinated. He has been taken in by the Department of Finance.

The Minister without interruption, please.

The burden of taxation has to be spread, a point which the Governor of the Central Bank made very clear.

That is the end of the Minister.

Having regard to the last part of the Minister's reply, it might be more appropriate if the Secretary of the Department answered questions sometimes instead of the Minister.

He may not necessarily agree with that type of reform.

My question is purely statistical. Average figures can be somewhat misleading and can be played different ways. With regard to farmers' incomes and the amount of tax paid by farmers, is the figure divided by the total number of farmers, the total number of farmers with a taxable income or those farmers on social welfare who do not have a taxable income? What system is used to estimate the average amount of tax paid by farmers? Is the widest possible denominator used——

It is based on the assessments.

How many farmers?

An average of 69,000.

Therefore, farmers who fill in a profile form but who do not have a taxable income are disregarded?

They are excluded. Also, approximately 18,000 farmers are sent a form once every three years by Revenue because they are never eligible. When this is updated every third year those farmers are excluded. In fact, checks are being made on approximately 75,000 farmers.

Will the Minister agree that these statistics are frightening from the point of view of wealth produced in the economy and that there are fewer people in the farming and agricultural community liable for tax? The Minister indicated that 69,000 farmers have been assessed for tax purposes, but only 27,000 of those pay tax and they are the only people who contributed to the figure the Minister mentioned earlier. Will the Minister also accept that there is a cyclical nature to farmers' earnings, that this is not a sheltered sector and that other contributions are being made? Does the Minister have any indication of the levies and contributions being paid by the various sectors of the economy to which the agricultural community must contribute?

That was the point I made in my lengthy reply, that it would not be just a straight assessment figure and, in fairness to the farmers, I included the other figures. They do not increase the total figure substantially but they increase it. I believe the figure was £33 million for 1993 and the figure for PRSI is £13 million. Therefore, we have included as many of the figures as we possibly can. I agree that a relatively small number of farmers are liable for tax.

Barr
Roinn