Written Answers Nos. 57 - 60
58. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Finance if consideration has been given to the unfair treatment of the secondary carer, who is the sole financial supporter of the primary carer and their children, being unable to receive the single person child carer credit when the primary carer is not in employment but simply refuses to relinquish the credit to the secondary carer; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43430/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the Deputy will be aware, the Single Person Child Carer Credit is, in the first instance, only available to the primary carer of the child.
The person who cares for the child for most of the year is entitled to the credit in the first instance. Agreement as to who will be the primary carer of a child is a matter for the parents or guardians. However, only the primary carer is entitled to the credit.
In circumstances where the primary carer cannot utilise the credit for example, because of insufficient taxable income - the primary carer may relinquish the credit and a secondary claimant may claim it. The requirement for a primary claimant to relinquish the credit before a claim from a secondary claimant can be considered is necessary, as in the first instance, only one credit is available in respect of a qualifying child or children.
There are many reasons why a primary carer may not wish to relinquish the credit. Only they can gauge whether their income would be of a sufficient amount over the course of a tax year to be able to utilise the credit. An individual may wish to retain the credit in the expectation that they may find employment during the year, for example. In addition, taxpayers are entitled to review their tax affairs over a four year look back period, and depending on circumstances, an individual might wish to retain the credit in order to offset any tax liability that might arise as a result of a review of their income tax liabilities in any of the years concerned.
Financial support alone is not sufficient for a parent to be deemed a legitimate secondary carer when it comes to entitlement to the credit. Ultimately, maintenance payments are a matter for parents and if necessary, the courts to decide. It is not possible, and indeed would not be appropriate, for the tax code to take account of every possible variable.
I have considered the possible automatic transfer of the credit in cases where a primary carer refuses to relinquish it. However, there are many reasons why this would not be feasible, including logistical, data protection and constitutional concerns.
59. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 308 of 4 November 2014, in view of the fact that these loans have gone through two rounds of auctions and remain unsold, if the liquidator of the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation will now invite the mortgage holders themselves to bid for their own loans, and will he encourage the State owned banks AIB and PTSB, wherever possible, to facilitate the borrowers to buy these mortgages; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43434/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Special Liquidators continue to implement the orderly and efficient wind down of IBRC in accordance with the provisions of the IBRC Act and the instructions issued by the Minister for Finance under the IBRC Act 2013.
As the Deputy is aware, for operational reasons, the loan assets of IBRC were divided into six portfolios: Evergreen, Sand, Rock, Salt, Stone and Pebble.
The Sand portfolio comprised 12,702 Irish originated residential mortgages with a par value of €1.8bn, most of which had transferred from Irish Nationwide Building Society. 64% of the Sand portfolio were sold to two buyers, namely Lone Star and Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.
The Special Liquidators have devised a further sales process in respect of the unsold residential mortgages (Project Pearl) so as to maximise the return to all remaining creditors of IBRC, including the State. This sales process is currently underway. It is not possible for me to interfere in the sales process developed by the Special Liquidators as to do so could have had a negative impact on the return achievable by the Special Liquidators. Such action could have left me open to challenge by other creditors of the bank.
The Special Liquidators have corresponded with all remaining residential mortgage holders of IBRC providing them with an opportunity to make written representations on the method of disposal of their loans and the criteria for determining who may bid for loan assets. Consideration has been given to these Borrower representations and the Special Liquidators have responded to these Borrower representations.
Having given due consideration to the representations and the professional advice received, the Special Liquidators have divided the remaining residential mortgages into two tranches. I am advised by the Special Liquidators that they expect the sales process for Project Pearl to be completed before 31 December 2014.
60. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will receive payment of their disadvantaged area scheme payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43335/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraAn application under the 2014 Single Payment/Disadvantaged Areas Scheme was received from the person named on 29 April 2014. Processing of this application has recently been finalised with payment under the Disadvantaged Area Scheme issuing directly to the nominated bank account of the person named on 6 November 2014.
