Written Answers Nos. 217-232
217. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the amount of value added tax received by the Revenue Commissioners in each of the years 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 from the sale of residential properties; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10381/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that it is not possible to furnish precise figures of the amount of VAT received from the sale of residential properties, as the information provided on VAT returns does not require the yield from particular activities to be identified.
218. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of companies engaged in contract manufacturing in a way that may distort economic data; and if he will provide the names of these companies. [10397/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI am advised by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) that there are currently 16 companies engaged in contract manufacturing. This number changes because companies which are involved in contract manufacturing in one period may not be in the following period. I do not have the names of the companies involved; the Statistics Act 1993 restricts the use of information supplied to the CSO solely to statistical purposes and prohibits identifying the undertakings which supply this information.
I am also advised by the CSO that contract manufacturing activities abroad for Irish companies in the recent quarters of 2014 in the Quarterly National Accounts and Balance of Payments have resulted in increased exports of goods relative to data previously released in the monthly trade release. In the National Accounts, monthly trade exports are adjusted for contract manufacturing and for other methodological and data purposes. However, these contract manufacturing activities also result in greater imports of services, in particular royalty imports (related to the use of intellectual property associated with the finished products) and the manufacturing services supplied by the contract manufacturer. In arriving at estimates of GDP it is necessary to subtract these service imports and other costs from the value of exports. The result shows that the overall impact on Ireland's GDP of these activities is not a significant factor in explaining the recent improvement in economic performance in this country.
219. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the way excluding the top five exporting companies from the data would affect Ireland's export figures; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10398/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI am advised by the CSO that total exports of goods and services from Ireland amounted to €184,564 m in 2013. The top 5 exporting firms accounted for €48,400 million, or 26.2 per cent, of the total exported in the year in question.
220. Deputy Pat Deering asked the Minister for Finance the reason a cohabiting couple is not permitted the same tax credits as a married couple. [10472/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraWhere a couple is cohabiting, rather than married or in a civil partnership, each partner is treated for the purposes of income tax as a separate and unconnected individual. Because they are treated separately for tax purposes, credits, tax bands and reliefs cannot be transferred from one partner to the other. Cohabitants do not have the same legal rights and obligations as a married couple or couple in a civil partnership, which is why they are not accorded similar treatment to couples who have a civil status that is recognised in law.
The basis for the current tax treatment of married couples derives from the Supreme Court decision in Murphy vs. Attorney General (1980), which held that it was contrary to the Constitution for a married couple, both of whom are working, to pay more tax than two single people living together and having the same income.
From a practical perspective, it would be very difficult to administer a regime for cohabitants which would be the same as that for married couples or civil partners. Married couples and civil partners have a verifiable official confirmation of their status. It would be difficult, intrusive and time-consuming to confirm declarations by individuals that they were actually cohabiting. It would also be difficult to establish when cohabitation started or ceased.
There would also be legal issues with regard to 'connected persons'. To counter tax avoidance, 'connected persons' are frequently defined throughout the various Tax Acts. The definitions extend to relatives and children of spouses and civil partners. This would be very difficult to prove and enforce in respect of persons connected with a cohabiting couple where the couple has no legal recognition. There may be an advantage in tax legislation for a married couple or civil partners as regards the extended rate band and the ability to transfer credits. However, their legal status has wider consequences from a tax perspective both for themselves and persons connected with them.
221. Deputy Pat Deering asked the Minister for Finance the reason some marriages, in particular religious ceremony marriages, from outside the country are not recognised by the Revenue Commissioners for the purpose of tax credits. [10473/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraFor the purposes of tax credits and other elements of tax law, Revenue recognises marriages contracted in and registered in the State. Revenue also recognises marriages contracted in and registered with the civil authorities under the laws of another country. Certificates of marriage may be required as proof of marriage. Religious ceremony marriages which are not registered with the civil authorities are not recognised by Revenue.
222. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Finance the way the increased financial return to the State from discoveries made under future exploration licenses and licensing options, as announced in June 2014 (details supplied), will be monitored; and the way the current and future returns can be scrutinised by Dáil Éireann. [10488/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI would like to thank the Deputy for this question but would advise that this is a matter for the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.
223. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Finance the percentage change in the total annual amount paid or expected to be paid per year to the Exchequer in taxation in respect of Ireland’s producing gas fields for the past three years from 2012; and the estimated approximate percentage increase to the Exchequer per year for the next five years. [10489/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that due to their obligation to observe confidentiality for taxpayers' information, and the small group of taxpayers involved in this case, precludes them from providing the information requested. I am also advised by the Commissioners that they do not forecast tax receipts for particular companies or particular activities into the future.
224. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Minister for Finance the position in respect of a person (details supplied) regarding the tax status of stay-at-home parents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10498/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe position is that all those paying income tax and or USC have benefitted from the income tax changes introduced in Budget 2015 where incomes are the same as they were in 2014. Based on the details supplied by you, it would appear that the couple concerned have benefitted by approximately €13 per week from the Budget tax measures. The Deputy will be aware that a cap of €14 per week was implemented as part of the Budget package to ensure that those with incomes in excess of €70,000 did not benefit more than those with incomes at that level. However, when increases in the level of Child Benefit introduced in the Budget are taken into account, the couple concerned are benefitting by around €15 per week.
The Government targeted its Budget package at the "squeezed middle", i.e. those earning between €32,000 and €70,000 per annum. While I am sympathetic to all those facing financial difficulties, the Revenue Commissioners inform me that over 87% of tax cases will have income of €70,000 or less in 2015. Therefore, it would be difficult to categorise households which have income in excess of €70,000 as being in a "middle income" bracket.
All married one-earner couples with sufficient income are benefitting from the increase in the standard rate band by €1,000 from €41,800 to €42,800 in Budget 2015. These couples also benefit from the cuts to the higher rate of income tax in the Budget, and from a reduction in USC if their income is under €87,500. The reason married one earners don't benefit as much from the income tax cuts, as a single individual or a married two-earner couple, is because they already pay much less income tax because of the transferable standard rate band. For example, a married one earner on €55,000 who has children will pay 55% less income tax than a single individual on the same income, in 2015.
The system of individualisation, which has been in the tax code since 1999, is now integral to the tax system. When first announced, the stated purpose of individualisation was essentially, to ease the burden on single persons (65% of the work force), to take workers on the average industrial wage out of the higher rate of tax and more generally to facilitate a reduction in the numbers paying tax at the higher rate. At the same time, a home carer allowance was introduced to compensate those who chose to stay at home to care for children rather than participate in the labour market.
Individualisation was progressed to some extent in later years but never completed. The result is that we now have a hybrid system, with the standard rate band partially transferable between spouses, €9,000 being the gap between the single and married one-earner bands.
To complete or to reverse individualisation would cost in the region of €800 million. The Commission on Taxation recommended that no change be made to the current system. It concluded that the current system represents a balance between, on the one hand, acknowledging the choices families make in caring for children and, on the other, taking account of the need to encourage labour market participation.
It is important to note that that reversal of individualisation would see a second spouse entering the workforce, being liable to the marginal rate of tax on the first euro of income. This would act as a significant disincentive for those affected spouses who wish to return to work.
225. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Finance his views on a matter (details supplied) regarding mortgages; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10539/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI have been informed that the bank has a comprehensive range of sustainable solutions available for customers in mortgage difficulties. Customers in arrears will be reviewed for eligibility based on affordability, their willingness to prioritise their mortgage payments and engage with the bank. The bank offers a Mortgage to Rent solution to the customer if they are deemed eligible.
From a general policy perspective, the approach of the Government is to support people in genuine mortgage arrears and where feasible to put in place a sustainable restructure to address and resolve such a difficulty. This is clearly set out in the Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears where it requires a lender in respect of a co-operating borrower to explore all of the options for an alternative repayment arrangement offered by that lender and that a lender must document its consideration of each option examined and the reasons why the options offered/not offered to the borrower are/are not appropriate and sustainable.
If a solution cannot be agreed between borrower and lender, or if it is agreed that a mortgage restructure is not a sustainable solution, there are alternative mechanisms available to allow a debtor remain in the house in appropriate cases. For example, the Mortgage to Rent scheme is available in cases where the house and household would be appropriate and eligible for social housing. Where the borrower and lender cannot agree on a sustainable mortgage restructure, the debtor has the option to formulate and propose a PIA to his/her secured and other creditor(s). This initiative rests solely with the debtor and, in formulating a PIA, a personal insolvency practitioner is under an onus, insofar as is reasonably practicable, to formulate the proposal on terms that will not require the debtor to dispose of an interest in or cease to occupy a principal private residence.
226. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 75 of 4 March 2015, if he will indicate if the board or management of Irish Bank Resolution Corporation consulted him in advance of the change that took place to the relationship framework and operational protocol, which govern interactions between him, as Minister, and the corporation; the set of circumstances which led to the introduction of a new framework and protocol; where the authority to issue it derived from; those who took the decision to do so, and the reason for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10566/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs part of the EU/IMF Programme of Financial Support, there were a number of conditions/actions which Ireland committed to, one of which was to develop a framework to govern the exercise of the State's ownership rights in the banks resulting from the capital injections, including to put in place relationship frameworks with the banks to establish the commercial basis for the banks' operations under government ownership. The commitment under paragraph 10 of the Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies dated 10 February 2012 indicated that the Minister for Finance was "finalizing relationship frameworks with the covered banks."
On this basis, Relationship Frameworks were put in place by my Department with each of the banks in which the State acquired an interest in the context of the financial crisis to govern the relationship between the State, as shareholder, and each bank. They were designed to recognise the separation of each bank from the State, to ensure their businesses would be run on a commercial, cost effective and independent basis designed to ensure the value of the banks as an asset to the State, and limit the State's intervention to the extent necessary to protect the public interest.
IBRC had a Relationship Framework in place from 2009. A revised Relationship Framework with IBRC was published on March 30, 2012 in line with the introduction of Relationship Frameworks for each of the banks in which the State had acquired an interest in the context of the financial crisis. That followed considerable interaction with the management and Board of IBRC.
227. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will instigate a technical assessment of the blowout in sand dunes at Banna Strand and Carrahane Strand in County Kerry with a view to preventing the environmental disaster which would result in a breach of the dunes at a point where only 10 m of dune remain, threatening the homes and farmland behind it with flooding by seawater; and if he will arrange for the filling of the dunes to prevent this. [10111/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraLocal flooding and coastal issues are a matter for Local Authorities to investigate and address in the first instance and it is open to Kerry County Council (KCC) to carry out flood mitigation and coastal protection works using its own resources.
The Office of Public Works (OPW) operates a Minor Flood Mitigation Works and Coastal Protection Scheme. This administrative Scheme's eligibility criteria, including a requirement that any measures are cost beneficial are published on the OPW website, www.opw.ie. It is not available for repair of damaged infrastructure or for maintenance of existing flood defence or coastal protection assets. A Local Authority may apply to the OPW for support under the scheme having regard to those eligibility criteria. Application forms are available on OPW's website under Flood Risk Management and decisions are made having regard to the overall availability of funding for flood risk management.
228. Deputy Seán Conlan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the reason no proper consultation has taken place between the Office of Public Works, the Department of Social Protection and property owners in Ballybay, County Monaghan, to find an alternative premises to ensure that the Department of Social Protection jobs will be retained in Ballybay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10113/15]
Amharc ar fhreagra229. Deputy Seán Conlan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the steps that have been taken by his Department and the Office of Public Works to have an alternative premises in Ballybay, County Monaghan, made available to the Department of Social Protection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10114/15]
Amharc ar fhreagra230. Deputy Seán Conlan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the reason, despite the fact that four property owners (details supplied) in Ballybay, County Monaghan, have offered their premises to the Office of Public Works, and have undertaken to do any upgrading works necessary at their own expense, his Department has failed and refused to engage with them; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10115/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 228 to 230, inclusive, together.
The Commissioners of Public Works have assessed the suitability of accommodation in Ballybay based on the Department of Social Protection's brief of accommodation requirements. The Commissioners currently lease two adjoining buildings in Ballybay which are not considered appropriate for the Department's existing business processes or future operational requirements.
The Commissioners have investigated other options in Ballybay and have inspected a number of properties, including those referred to by the Deputy, with a view to potentially adapting a building to meet the Department of Social Protection's requirements. Significant investment would be required to bring the proposed properties up to modern standards which would not be financially sustainable based on prevailing rental levels.
In this context, the Department of Social Protection has decided to move the current facilities to premises in Monaghan town that will fully meet the Department's accommodation brief. In addition, the new location can also facilitate the Department's requirement to establish a public office for issuing Public Service Cards in County Monaghan.
231. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he has received an application for funding for coastal erosion works from Donegal County Council for protection works at Maghery Strand in west Donegal where large volumes sand are being blown inland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10278/15]
Amharc ar fhreagra232. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he has received an application for funding for coastal erosion works from Donegal County Council for protection works at Buncronan, Mountcharles, County Donegal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10544/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 231 and 232 together.
Local flooding and coastal erosion issues are matters for Local Authorities to investigate and address in the first instance and Donegal County Council (DCC) may carry out flood mitigation and coastal protection works using its own resources.
The Government Decision of 11 February, 2014 allocated total funding of up to €19.6m for the repair of existing coastal protection and flood defences damaged in the severe weather in late 2013 and early 2014 based on submissions made by the relevant local authorities to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. A total sum of €662,000 was allocated to DCC under the Government Decision. The local authorities submitted to the Office of Public Works (OPW) programmes of repair works setting out how they intended to spend their allocations. DCC's programme of works did include for works at Maghery Strand. Funding for works at this location was not approved however, as, on the basis of the information provided, the proposed works did not meet the criteria of reinstatement of existing built coastal defence infrastructure. It is for DCC to resubmit an application which meets criteria. The programme of works did not include works at Buncronan, Mountcharles and as a result there is no specific provision for works at Buncronan in the total sum of €662,000 allocated to DCC under the Government Decision. As it was not included in DCC's programme any proposals for works in that location must be considered outside of the Government Decision.
The OPW operates a Minor Flood Mitigation Works and Coastal Protection Scheme. This administrative Scheme's eligibility criteria, including a requirement that any measures are cost beneficial are published on the OPW website, www.opw.ie. It is not available for repair of damaged infrastructure or for maintenance of existing flood defence or coastal protection assets. A Local Authority may apply to the OPW for support under the scheme having regard to those eligibility criteria. Application forms are available on OPW's website under Flood Risk Management and decisions are made having regard to the overall availability of funding for flood risk management.
