Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Tax Code

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 17 January 2017

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

Ceisteanna (51)

Niall Collins

Ceist:

51. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Finance if, following the recent change in approach to patronage share schemes, a tax yield impact analysis of such a change in tax policy, taking into account the average effective rate of income tax for affected farmers, has been undertaken, balanced against the adverse impact of CGT yield at 33% and increased VAT flat rate addition payable to farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1732/17]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

The Deputy's question would appear to suggest that Revenue should, or indeed could, analyse a transaction and select a tax treatment based on the maximum potential yield for the Exchequer.  This is most certainly not the case as the Oireachtas sets out in legislation the relevant tax treatment that should be applicable to various sources of income or gains.

The Revenue Commissioners, as I have said already, are a statutorily independent body, charged with collecting the taxes lawfully owing to the Exchequer, and they do so in accordance with the legislation enacted by these Houses of the Oireachtas. The Revenue Commissioners interpret the underpinning legislation and are charged with the application of that law equally to ensure fair treatment of all taxpayers.

I would again reiterate that I have been advised by Revenue that there has been no change in policy in relation to this matter and the position being adopted by Revenue is in accordance with long established taxation principles that consideration received that is directly related to produce sold, whether in the form of cash or shares, is subject to taxation as income.

As there has been no change in policy by the Revenue Commissioners, I do not see the benefit of providing a tax yield impact analysis as sought by the Deputy. Such calculations are normally completed where a change of policy is being brought forward by Government and the associated estimated cost or yield is calculated in order to inform the Oireachtas in relation to the impact on the Exchequer of such a policy change. Such costings help to inform the associated debates in these Houses. In this case however, the position is that the Revenue Commissioners are interpreting and implementing tax law as it stands and there has been no departure from existing policy and interpretation.

Depending on the particular circumstances and incomes of each taxpayer involved, the setting out of this tax treatment by the Revenue Commissioners could result in additional taxes being due, or indeed in a reduced tax burden for some. Calculation of a tax yield impact analysis in such a scenario, would be difficult and as outlined previously, unwarranted given the position of the Revenue Commissioners that there has been no change in practice on their part in terms of the appropriate tax treatment of such income.

Barr
Roinn