Written Replies Nos. 80 to 97
80. Deputy Patrick O'Donovan asked the Minister for Finance if the loss of a hand through injury, amputation or congenital amputation will qualify a person for a primary medical certificate and tax relief on the cost of buying and adapting a vehicle under the disabled drivers scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12514/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Scheme provides relief from VAT and VRT (up to a certain limit) on the purchase of an adapted car for transport of a person with specific severe and permanent physical disabilities, payment of a fuel grant, and an exemption from Motor Tax.
To qualify for the Scheme an applicant must be in possession of a Primary Medical Certificate. To qualify for a Primary Medical Certificate, an applicant must be permanently and severely disabled within the terms of the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994 and satisfy one of the following conditions:
- be wholly or almost wholly without the use of both legs;
- be wholly without the use of one leg and almost wholly without the use of the other leg such that the applicant is severely restricted as to movement of the lower limbs;
- be without both hands or without both arms;
- be without one or both legs;
- be wholly or almost wholly without the use of both hands or arms and wholly or almost wholly without the use of one leg;
- have the medical condition of dwarfism and have serious difficulties of movement of the lower limbs.
The Senior Medical Officer for the relevant local Health Service Executive administrative area makes a professional clinical determination as to whether an individual applicant satisfies the medical criteria. A successful applicant is provided with a Primary Medical Certificate, which is required under the Regulations to claim the reliefs provided for in the Scheme.
An unsuccessful applicant can appeal the decision of the Senior Medical Officer to the Disabled Drivers Medical Board of Appeal, which makes a new clinical determination in respect of the individual. The Regulations mandate that the Medical Board of Appeal is independent in the exercise of its functions to ensure the integrity of its clinical determinations.
In the case of both the initial application for a Primary Medical Certificate and a subsequent appeal, the clinical determinations are made by qualified physicians on examination of the applicant and with reference to the six criteria outlined above. Both the Senior Medical Officer and the Disabled Drivers Medical Board of Appeal are independent in their clinical determinations.
81. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Minister for Finance his plans to broaden the spectrum of disabilities that would be accepted under the primary certificate scheme (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12621/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Scheme provides relief from VAT and Vehicle Registration Tax (up to a certain limit), an exemption from motor tax and a grant in respect of fuel, on the purchase of an adapted car for transport of a person with specific severe and permanent physical disabilities.
To qualify for the Scheme an applicant must be in possession of a Primary Medical Certificate. To qualify for a Primary Medical Certificate, an applicant must be permanently and severely disabled within the terms of the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994 and satisfy one of the following conditions:
- be wholly or almost wholly without the use of both legs;
- be wholly without the use of one leg and almost wholly without the use of the other leg such that the applicant is severely restricted as to movement of the lower limbs;
- be without both hands or without both arms;
- be without one or both legs;
- be wholly or almost wholly without the use of both hands or arms and wholly or almost wholly without the use of one leg;
- have the medical condition of dwarfism and have serious difficulties of movement of the lower limbs.
The Scheme and qualifying criteria were designed specifically for those with severe physical disabilities and are, therefore, necessarily precise.
The Scheme represents a significant tax expenditure. Between the Vehicle Registration Tax and VAT foregone, and the fuel grant, the scheme is estimated to have cost of the order of €65m in 2016. This figure does not include the revenue foregone to the Local Government Fund in the respect of the relief from Motor Tax provided to members of the Scheme.
The disability criteria for the tax concessions available under the scheme have changed over time. When the scheme was first introduced in 1968, the legislation only allowed for one medical ground. In 1989, four new medical grounds were added and in 1994, one new medical ground was added.
I recognise the important role that the Scheme plays in expanding the mobility of citizens with disabilities. I have managed to maintain the relief at current levels throughout the crisis despite the requirement for significant fiscal consolidation. From time to time I receive representations from individuals who feel they would benefit from the Scheme but do not qualify under the six criteria. While I have sympathy for these cases, given the scale and scope of the Scheme, I have no plans to expand the medical criteria beyond the six currently provided for in the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994.
82. Deputy John Curran asked the Minister for Finance the progress he is making with regard to establishing a special purpose vehicle, SPV, to provide off-balance sheet funding to support the provision of social housing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12440/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the Deputy will be aware, in line with Rebuilding Ireland commitments, the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA), the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund (ISIF) and a number of key Government Departments are examining the feasibility of establishing a funding vehicle, in conjunction with the private sector, which could facilitate investment in social and affordable housing. The objective is to create an 'off-balance' mechanism which would facilitate investment which is additional to that being provided directly by the State and which does not impact on the General Government Balance. This investment could take the form of either funding or forward purchasing the delivery of new mixed-tenure residential developments.
While a major objective of any such funding vehicle is to leverage additionality in terms of social housing supply, it is envisaged that a substantial portion of the overall supply of new units may need to be for private housing to meet the commerciality test and to satisfy the requirements of an off-balance sheet investment model. Key factors which must be addressed to facilitate ISIF involvement in such projects include: the commercial viability of proposals; Eurostat treatment of fund structures which receive a substantial proportion of their revenue from Government sources; and the ability to create off-balance sheet vehicles outside of the existing PPP model.
In exploring the development of this model there has been input from a wide array of actors, including my Department, ISIF/NTMA, the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, CSO/Eurostat, the European Investment Bank and others. To date, there have been a series of meetings between these actors at which useful clarifications were received from CSO/Eurostat and the European Investment Bank.
NTMA/ISIF informs me that while it has made progress in conjunction with the other stakeholders in the public and private sectors in respect of this opportunity, as well as other potential social housing investment opportunities, there are still considerable hurdles including commerciality and balance sheet treatment as identified in Rebuilding Ireland. These hurdles must be overcome before any such proposals can be brought to a successful conclusion. Detailed work on the design of a funding vehicle is ongoing, and the actual establishment, management and operation of such a vehicle will require further time, investment and engagement.
83. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the amount the State Claims Agency paid in legal costs to solicitors representing the agency in 2015 and 2016; the amount paid in legal costs to solicitors acting for plaintiffs; the top ten payments made to named legal firms representing the agency and plaintiffs, respectively, in 2016; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12492/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the Deputy will be aware, the NTMA is designated as the State Claims Agency (SCA) when performing the claims management and risk management functions designated to it under the National Treasury Management Agency Act 1990, as amended.
In answer to the Deputy's question, I refer to the material provided by the SCA and which is outlined below. The material provided by the State Claims Agency covers the amounts paid during the relevant period, and the report is correct as of 7 March 2017.
This information has been extracted from the National Incident Management System (NIMS). This is a confidential and secure end-to-end risk management tool which manages the reporting of incidents, including claims. It is hosted by the SCA for the HSE, other Healthcare enterprises and State Authorities. An incident can be a harmful Incident (Adverse Event), no harm incident, near miss, dangerous occurrence (reportable circumstance) or complaint. An Incident can relate to a person, property, crash/collision, dangerous occurrence or complaint.
In reviewing the material the Deputy should note that:
- All figures are based on payments made within a transactional year recorded on NIMS.
- All figures are inclusive of V.A.T.
Agency Legal costs paid to solicitors in 2015 and 2016
Table 1: Cost of payments made to solicitors working on behalf of the SCA
|
Year |
Agency Solicitor costs |
|
2015 |
€13,556,519 |
|
2016 |
€15,334,445 |
|
Total |
€28,890,965 |
Plaintiff legal costs paid in 2015 and 2016
- The level of legal costs paid to plaintiffs' legal representatives is carefully reviewed and, wherever possible and by means of negotiations, the SCA seeks to achieve the maximum possible reduction in legal costs. If the SCA cannot successfully agree the level of legal costs to be paid to plaintiffs' legal representatives, the matter is determined by a Taxing Master.
Plaintiff legal costs relate to the payment made to the Plaintiff's legal team i.e. Solicitors and Counsel and are also inclusive of expert fees which are discharged by the Plaintiff's solicitor. These expert fees may relate to actuarial, engineering, medical, witness fees etc.
Table 2: Cost of plaintiff legal costs paid by the SCA
|
Year |
Plaintiff Legal costs |
|
2015 |
€32,817,357 |
|
2016 |
€37,969,204 |
|
Total |
€70,786,560 |
Top 10 agency solicitors by legal costs paid in 2016.
- A number of solicitors act on behalf of the agency in defence of clinical negligence and general negligence cases.
- Table 3 shows the total amount of all transactions paid to each solicitor firm within the transactional year 2016.
Table 3: Top 10 Agency Solicitors by amount paid in 2016
|
Agency Solicitor |
Amount Paid |
|
Mason Hayes and Curran Solicitors |
€3,096,469 |
|
Hayes Solicitors |
€3,006,387 |
|
Ronan Daly Jermyn |
€2,284,491 |
|
Comyn Kelleher Tobin |
€1,347,652 |
|
Doyle Solicitors |
€953,191 |
|
Arthur Cox |
€826,587 |
|
A&L Goodbody |
€807,001 |
|
DAC Beachcroft |
€610,159 |
|
VP McMullin Solicitors |
€473,330 |
|
Hegarty and Armstrong Solicitors |
€368,362 |
Top 10 legal firms acting on behalf of plaintiffs by legal costs paid in 2016
- Plaintiff legal costs relate to the payment made to the Plaintiff's legal team i.e. Solicitors and Counsel and are also inclusive of expert fees which are discharged by the Plaintiff's solicitor. These expert fees may relate to actuarial, engineering, medical, witness fees etc.
- Table 4 shows the total amount of all transactions paid to each legal firm within the transactional year 2016.
Table 4: Top 10 Plaintiff legal costs paid by amount in 2016
|
Legal Firm |
Amount Paid |
|
Augustus Cullen Law Solicitors |
€5,775,249 |
|
Cantillons Solicitors |
€5,087,413 |
|
Callan Tansey Solicitors |
€2,029,357 |
|
Sheridan Quinn Solicitors |
€910,850 |
|
Cian O'Carroll |
€850,586 |
|
Eustace and Co. |
€588,467 |
|
Ivor Fitzpatrick and Co. |
€540,026 |
|
Synnott Lawline |
€520,529 |
|
M.W. Keller and Son |
€491,631 |
|
M. M. Halley and Son Solicitors |
€445,190 |
84. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Minister for Finance his views on an issue (details supplied ) relating to section 599 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997; his plans to amend the Act in view of this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12546/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Deputy asked about the the capital gains tax (CGT) reliefs under Section 599 (Disposals within family of business or farm) of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. More specifically, in the details supplied, he asked why it is that under Section 599 those aged 55-65 pay no CGT if transferring qualifying assets to their children, or to a niece or nephew who has worked in the business (as the Act states "substantially on a full-time basis, for the period of 5 years ending with the disposal), but those aged 66 and over can only enjoy relief from CGT where the assets concerned are valued at no more than €3 million.
I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that individuals aged 66 or over who transfer qualifying assets to their children can qualify for CGT retirement relief provided those qualifying assets were owned and used by the individuals concerned for business or farming purposes for a period of at least 10 years prior to the disposal. Full relief from CGT applies on a gain arising in respect of a transfer of qualifying assets on or after 1 January 2014, where the market value of the assets is €3m or less. Where the market value of the assets is greater than €3m and the disposal is on or after 1 January 2014, section 599 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides that relief will apply as if the value of the assets transferred were €3m. Only the gain on the amount in excess of €3m will be charged to CGT at the rate of 33%.
In terms of the details supplied I should clarify that if an individual is aged 66 or over and transfers qualifying assets to their children, and if the value is more than €3m, relief is given to the individual transferring the assets on the gain up to the amount of €3m.
Marginal relief does not apply in the case of transfers by individuals aged 66 or over to their children.
I have no plans to amend the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 in respect of this matter.
85. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Finance if he will address issues with regard to the cost of insurance (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12547/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs Minister for Finance, I am responsible for the development of the legal framework governing financial regulation. Neither I nor the Central Bank of Ireland can interfere in the provision or pricing of insurance products, as these matters are of a commercial nature, and are determined by insurance companies based on an assessment of the risks they are willing to accept. This position is reinforced by the EU framework for insurance which expressly prohibits Member States from adopting rules which require insurance companies to obtain prior approval of the pricing or terms and conditions of insurance products.
However, I do accept that it is possible for the State to play a role in helping to stabilise the market and deal with factors contributing to the cost of insurance. Consequently, I established the Cost of Insurance Working Group and appointed Minister of State Eoghan Murphy as Chair. The Report on the Cost of Motor Insurance was finalised in December 2016, approved by Cabinet on 10 January, 2017, and subsequently published. It contains 33 recommendations and 71 actions which are detailed in an action plan contained in the Report with agreed timelines for implementation. Work on carrying out these recommendations is well underway and I am confident that the report's 71 action points will be implemented by the end of 2018, with 45 due for completion this year. The Working Group continues to meet regularly and will report on a quarterly basis detailing its progress. As part of its second phase, the Working Group is now examining issues related to Employer Liability and Public Liability insurance including the impact of the cost of insurance on the competitiveness of particular business sectors.
With regard to the road passenger industry in particular, the issues are in the main similar to those affecting drivers generally, notwithstanding that there are risks that are specific to the sector. While there is no simple solution to reduce the cost of insurance, I believe that with cooperation and commitment between all parties, fairer premiums can be delivered for consumers, including coach companies, without unnecessary delay. This in turn should lead to greater stability in the pricing of motor insurance and should help prevent the volatility that we have seen in the market in the past. It should also better facilitate new entrants to the market. Taken together, these measures should address many of the issues raised by the road passenger industry.
86. Deputy Bobby Aylward asked the Minister for Finance the level of engagement that has taken place between his Department and the insurance industry to ensure that appropriate insurance is available to persons residing in an area in which flooding has never occurred but who are being excluded from cover, en masse, by insurance providers due to their Eircode; his views on such practices; the measures which have been implemented by his Department to hold insurance providers to account and protect the consumer in such instances; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12596/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraI am conscious of the difficulties that the absence of flood cover can cause to householders and businesses alike.
However, you should be aware that the provision of insurance is a commercial matter for insurance companies, which has to be based on a proper assessment of the risks they are accepting. This assessment will in many cases include insurers own presumptions based on their private modelling and research. Consequently, neither the Government nor the Central Bank can interfere in the provision or pricing of insurance products or have the power to direct insurance companies to provide flood cover to specific individuals or businesses. This position is reinforced by the EU framework for insurance which expressly prohibits Member States from adopting rules which require insurance companies to obtain prior approval of the pricing or terms and conditions of insurance products.
Government policy in relation to flooding is focused on the development of a sustainable, planned and risk-based approach to dealing with flooding problems. This in turn should lead to the increased availability of flood insurance. To achieve this aim, there is a focus on:
- prioritising spending on flood relief measures by the Office of Public Works (OPW) and relevant local authorities,
- development and implementation of plans by the OPW to implement flood relief schemes, and
- improving channels of communication between the OPW and the insurance industry in order to reach a better understanding about the provision of flood cover in marginal areas.
This strategy is complemented by a Memorandum of Understanding between the OPW and Insurance Ireland, the representative body for insurance companies in Ireland, which provides for the exchange of data in relation to completed flood defence schemes which should provide a basis for the increased provision of flood insurance in areas where works have been completed. In this regard, the Insurance Ireland/OPW working group, which the Department of Finance attends, now meets on a quarterly basis to support the information flow and improve the understanding of issues between both parties. A further meeting of this working group is scheduled this month.
A sub-group has also been set up to explore the technical and administrative arrangements that may allow for the further sharing of data on flood insurance cover for those 300 areas where OPW has mapped flood risk through the CFRAM programme. The first meeting of this sub-group was held in January.
Finally, as the Deputy will be aware, the consumer has already recourse to the Financial Services Ombudsman to make a complaint in relation to any dealings with a Financial Services or Insurance provider during which they feel they have been unfairly treated. In addition, individuals who are experiencing difficulty in obtaining insurance or believe that they are being treated unfairly may contact Insurance Ireland which operates a free Insurance Information Service for those who have queries, complaints or difficulties in relation to insurance.
87. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the classification of the announced dividend for the State from a bank (details supplied) in terms of being on-balance sheet or off-balance sheet revenue; if it will take the form of a financial transaction; the purposes for which it can be used; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12632/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra88. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if it is possible to use the proceeds of the sale of a bank (details supplied) or dividends from the bank to fund or partly fund the proposed National Children's Hospital; if he has been consulted on this issue by the Minister for Health; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12633/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 87 and 88 together.
The Ireland Strategic Investment Fund (ISIF) holds the AIB shares on behalf of the State. Dividend payments are therefore made to the ISIF. Payments from the ISIF to the Exchequer arising from the proceeds of the disposal of the State's shareholdings in the Banks are provided for under the NTMA (Amendment) Act 2014. This legislation allows the Minister to direct the Agency to make such payments after having consulted the Agency.
Regarding the sale of financial assets, these type of transactions do not result in a beneficial impact to the General Government Balance (GGB) under the European System of Accounts (ESA) framework. This is due to the fact that it is classified as a 'financial transaction' whereby it is essentially the exchange of one form of asset (shares, equities, loans) for another kind (cash). Consequently, the sale of any shareholding in Allied Irish Bank (AIB) would not count as general government revenue. Accordingly, there will not be increased capacity to spend on capital projects as a result of the sale of shares in AIB without affecting the general government balance.
However, while not improving the deficit, cash proceeds arising from the sale of AIB shares that are transferred to the Exchequer would reduce the Exchequer borrowing requirement and ultimately result in lower general government debt. A lower level of debt is not only beneficial in terms of the fiscal sustainability of the State but would also result in reduced interest payments in future years. The strategy of reducing the national debt is consistent with the Government policy of repaying the borrowing previously undertaken to finance the recapitalisation of the banking sector during the financial crisis. It is my view, therefore, that because public indebtedness rose partly due to the recapitalisation of the Banks, it is appropriate to use one-off revenue from divesting the State of its banking assets to reduce debt.
Regarding proceeds from dividends, these are typically recorded as property income in the ESA framework. Therefore any dividend payments would be recorded as General Government Revenue and, as such, would improve the General Government Balance.
As to what this revenue can be spent on, money in the Exchequer is fungible. Accordingly, there is no linkage between specific receipts and specific expenditures.
89. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide, in respect of VAT paid for January and February 2017, an in-depth analysis of the total figure paid (details supplied). [12645/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraI am advised by Revenue that data in relation to VAT receipts from January and February 2017 are still being processed, and in many cases returns in relation to payments for this period are not yet due to be filed. It is therefore not possible to provide the full detail requested by the Deputy.
However, at end-February 2017, €2,816 million was paid into the Exchequer in respect of VAT receipts. This represents a year-on-year increase of just under 17% or €407 million. Based on preliminary data:
- The majority of VAT receipts (nearly 85%) in the period relate to VAT internal, collected from the supply of goods and services in Ireland. This represents an increase of around 12% compared to 2016 levels.
- VAT on goods either (i) imported into Ireland from outside the EU and paid at the point of entry; or (ii) on exciseable goods released from bonded warehouses accounts for around 12% of receipts in the period. This represents an increase of 34% compared to 2016 levels.
- VAT receipts received under the Mini One Stop Shop (VAT MOSS) account for around 4% of receipts in the period. On 1 January 2015, new EU VAT rules came into effect changing the place of supply in respect of all supplies of telecommunications, broadcasting and electronic (TBE) services to consumers from the place where the supplier is located to the place where the consumer resides. VAT MOSS, which is an optional scheme, also came into operation on 1 January 2015 allowing business to submit returns and pay the relevant VAT due to Member States through the web portal of one Member State, instead of having to register for VAT in multiple Member States.
- VAT receipts of around €15 million were collected through settlement of audits and other compliance interventions in the period. In addition to the above, I am advised that:
- VAT collected by Revenue and remitted to other Member States for services under the EU rules governing the place of supply TBE services totalled €244 million in January and February 2017. The total value of payments due to other Member States, but not yet remitted to them is less than €1 million.
- The value of VAT repayments made as part of normal business activity in the period was approximately €670 million. All figures noted above are provisional and may be revised.
90. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if a complaints process has been put in place for the 2,141 SMEs which were placed into a group by a bank (details supplied); if this process is operational for these customers here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12647/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra91. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if the Central Bank has been asked to approve any complaints process put in place for the 2,141 SME customers involved in an issue (details supplied); if the Central Bank approved this complaints process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12648/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra92. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he or the Central Bank are satisfied that the 2,141 Irish SME customers placed into a group by a bank (details supplied) have been contacted appropriately and directly by the bank outlining clearly the complaints process put in place; if not, when the Central Bank expects this communication to take place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12649/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra93. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if the complaints process for the 2,141 SME customers of a bank (details supplied) placed into a group is the exact same as the one put in place by the bank for UK customers; if the independent third party was appointed by the bank; if the Central Bank is satisfied with the appointment process of the independent third party; if an Irish independent third party will be appointed or if the British independent third party will be asked to judge on Irish cases; if he and the Central Bank are satisfied that a British independent third party will be able to adequately assess Irish cases; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12650/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra94. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if, in the case of the complaints process put in place for the 2,141 Irish SME customers of a bank (details supplied) placed into a group, it is standard practice to deduct refunds to the customers from debt outstanding from the customers; if he and the Central Bank are satisfied that this compensation is adequate for SME customers whose financial position may have been worsened by extra fees applied as a result of being placed in the group; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12651/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 90 to 94, inclusive, together.
I am confident that legislative changes since the financial crisis have equipped the Central Bank with an array of investigative, regulatory and enforcement powers to ensure that regulated financial service providers adhere to the requirements of financial services legislation. These changes include significantly enhanced powers for the Central Bank to gather information under the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013 which broadened the Banks' information gathering and authorised officer powers.
I am informed by the Central Bank that, while it cannot generally comment on interactions with regulated firms, Ulster Bank Ireland D.A.C. is engaging with the Bank in relation to this matter. This is properly in line with the 2013 Act and its revised provisions for potential enforcement actions.
On this matter, the Ulster Bank Chief Executive recently stated that RBS has announced a new complaints review process overseen by an independent third party, and, the automatic refund of complex fees to SME customers in Global Restructuring Group (GRG) in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland between 2008 and 2013. It is a matter for the Central Bank to determine whether it is satisfied with this approach and whether it will utilise its extensive powers under the 2013 Act.
I am informed that the Central Bank does not intend to provide further information at this time on the process that is currently underway. I am sure that Deputies will note that the Central Bank is properly undertaking its enforcement role by the recent sizeable settlements in enforcement cases.
In addition to this enforcement role, the Deputy may be aware that the Central Bank is proactively regulating the financial system and has issued regulations aimed at protecting SMEs when dealing with regulated and unregulated loan owners, whose loans must be serviced by credit servicing firms under the Consumer Protection (Regulation of Credit Servicing Firms) 2015. These strengthened Central Bank regulations include the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013 (Section 48) (Lending to Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises) Regulations 2015 which came into operation for regulated lenders other than credit unions on 1 July 2016 and, in the case of credit unions, on 1 January 2017. These revised SME Regulations introduce specific requirements for regulated lenders, including:
- Contacting SME borrowers who have been in arrears for 15 working days;
- Warning SME borrowers if they are in danger of being classified as not co-operating; and
- Expanding the grounds for appeal and setting up an internal appeals panel.
Under these SME Regulations, regulated financial services firms must have a complaints handling procedure in place. Any complaints against financial institutions should first be discussed with the institution concerned.
95. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide details of the Revenue Commissioners' current compliance activity in relation to offshore transactions; the number of solicitor firms identified to date as being associated with offshore transactions; the number of inquiry letters in respect of such transactions issued by the Revenue Commissioners to solicitor firms for each year since 2010; the number of cases involving offshore transactions for which enforcement action has been taken since 2010 and the tax yield in respect of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12652/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra96. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the number of persons or entities that have made a voluntary disclosure to the Revenue Commissioners since budget day in October 2016 concerning the ending of the opportunity to make a qualifying disclosure in respect of offshore assets and accounts; the yield from these voluntary disclosures; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12653/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 95 and 96 together.
I am advised by Revenue that, since my Financial Statement to the House on 11 October 2016, 20 qualifying disclosures relating to offshore matters have been received, resulting in settlements amounting to €205,012 in tax, interest and penalties. The intention to make a disclosure has been indicated to Revenue in two other cases, and a payment on account of €47,000 has been made in one of them.
The work of Revenu's offshore assets project has been undertaken primarily by way of enquiry letters issued on the basis of information relating to offshore transactions that Revenue obtained from financial institutions on foot of High Court orders. In the period from 2010 to 2016, 8,942 enquiry letters were issued, and most of these enquiries were resolved through explanations provided about the offshore transactions in question. During those years, settlements amounting to some €71 million in tax, interest and penalties were made in 525 cases, including a number of cases involving voluntary disclosures.
The data received by Revenue on foot of High Court Orders included information showing movements of funds in and out of solicitors' accounts. Some 730 cases of this kind have been identified and, after conclusion of legal issues arising from earlier enquiries, Revenue issued 47 enquiry letters to solicitors in 2015 and 67 in 2016. This work is ongoing.
The international environment is changing with closer co-operation and information sharing between tax authorities worldwide aimed at identifying those who hide their profits or gains offshore. Ireland has been an early adopter of such initiatives including FATCA the Inter-Governmental Agreement to share financial account information with the United States and the OECD Common Reporting Standard. In this context I introduced specific measures in the Finance Act 2016 to ensure that from 1 May 2017, tax defaulters whose default relates directly or indirectly to offshore matters will be unable to avail of the benefits of the current disclosure regime. It makes no sense to provide an incentive, in the form of a disclosure regime for defaulters, in respect of information which Revenue will have, as a result of these exchange of information initiatives.
If a taxpayer has tax compliance issues relating to offshore matters there is however still an opportunity, if they come forward before 1 May 2017, to avail of the current qualifying disclosure benefits. These are set out in the Code of Practice for Revenue Audit and other Compliance Interventions (the Code) and include reduced penalties, avoiding publication in the list of tax defaulters and not being investigated by Revenue with a view to prosecution. Full details of the Code and the disclosure scheme, including Frequently Asked Questions, are available on the Revenue website.
97. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide, in respect of each organisation deemed to be a public body, including State agencies, Government Departments, local authorities, statutory bodies, section 38 and section 39 funded organisations and third level education bodies, the area in which the Revenue Commissioners have identified interest, penalties and-or arrears of tax as being owed at any time since 2010; the detail of such interest, penalties and arrears of tax calculated as being owed by public sector organisations for each year since 2010; the amount collected to date in each case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12655/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraRevenue has advised me that its records are not maintained in a manner that facilitates the compilation of the information requested by the Deputy.
The broad range of bodies and extended timelines included in the Question would require very extensive manual data extraction, which Revenue could not guarantee to be fully inclusive or accurate.
