Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Tax and Social Welfare Codes.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 25 January 2006

Wednesday, 25 January 2006

Ceisteanna (705)

Dan Boyle

Ceist:

811 Mr. Boyle asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way in which his Department determines the irregular income of artists and musicians in assessing entitlement to social welfare payments. [1768/06]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

I understand that the Deputy is referring to the assessment of means of a person who has an irregular income for the purposes of claiming unemployment assistance. In applying the legislation, deciding officers do not treat artists or musicians any differently to any other unemployment benefit or assistance claimant.

Unemployment assistance is a means tested payment. Assessment of means includes any cash income, the value of any saving or investments, property other than the person's home and any other maintenance received by the claimant. The income of a claimant with no dependants and who is casually employed is assessed as follows. A disregard of €12.70 is deducted for each day worked and 60% of the balance is assessed as means. If the claimant has a spouse-partner who works up to three days each week a disregard of €38.09 applies when assessing the claimant's means. If the spouse-partner works four days or more per week, a disregard of €88.88 applies. A full qualified adult allowance is payable where the spouse-partner earns up to €88.88 per week and a reduced qualified adult allowance is payable where the spouse earns between €88.89 and €239.99 per week. No qualified adult allowance is payable where the weekly earnings of the spouse-partner are in excess of €240.

Where a person claims unemployment assistance and continues to be engaged in self-employment, the deciding officer, in the absence of any other means of ascertaining it, will assess the net income received in the past year. Income from irregular-self employment may vary from week to week and the current arrangements of assessing the income over a full year avoids the necessity to continuously recalculate a person's means. I am satisfied that this arrangement is a fair and reasonable method of estimating income from irregular-self employment for the purposes of unemployment assistance. However, if there is a change in the person's position which is likely to have an ongoing effect on the amount earned from self employment, this matter should be brought to the attention of the deciding officer or, alternatively, if the person is already in receipt of unemployment assistance, a review of means should be sought. I would also like to point out that a person may appeal to the independent social welfare appeals office if he or she is dissatisfied with any decision of a deciding officer.

Barr
Roinn