Pearse Doherty
Question:115. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will consider applying a 75% windfall tax on the profits of energy companies, including electricity companies. [68614/26]
Ceisteanna ar Sonraíodh Uain Dóibh - Priority Questions
Energy Prices
From next Monday, over 1 million households will see gas and electricity prices begin to increase. Households lose out but big energy companies will be the big winners. Energy companies will rake in even greater profits while ordinary people are left to carry the burden. Will the Minister bring forward a windfall tax on these excess profits and use the money to help households struggling to keep the lights on and heat their homes this winter?
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta. More broadly regarding energy prices and the like, I am conscious of the pressures people are feeling in relation to energy bills. They are real, not just in Ireland but across the European Union and large parts of the world. In an Irish context, we will have our budget next Tuesday, when we will endeavour to assist people with those bills, particularly through the winter period. The Government is conscious of the increased financial pressures on households and businesses in recent months. In response, it has introduced a number of measures to help reduce - or at least suppress the growth of - fuel prices for households and businesses, with additional supports for key sectors of the Irish economy and supports more widely in relation to excise reductions.
The European Commission's AccelerateEU communication addresses the EU's rising energy costs and volatile fossil fuel markets and aims to accelerate the clean energy transition and strengthen EU energy resilience. While the communication notes member states may take domestic measures, no EU-wide approach has yet been agreed. The temporary solidarity contribution, TSC, was introduced in line with the Council regulation of 6 October 2022 to tackle windfall gains being made in the energy sector following the commencement of the war in Ukraine. The TSC formed part of a co-ordinated European response, reflecting the highly interconnected nature of EU energy markets - when we acted, we did so at an EU level - and a view that an emergency intervention to mitigate the effects of high energy prices at the time could not be sufficiently achieved by member states individually. It continues to be our view that tackling the energy crisis in a co-ordinated way between EU member states is preferable, given the interconnectedness of EU energy markets.
Governments across Europe are rightly attentive to developments in energy markets and their impact on households, businesses and the wider economy. As Minister of Finance, and in the context of our Presidency of the Council of the EU, as I think we discussed before, we put the topic of a windfall tax on the agenda of the ECOFIN meeting in Dublin and I have requested the European Commission to reflect on those discussions and report back at a meeting of ECOFIN next Thursday and Friday in Luxembourg. I will update the House after that.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. The Minister knows the European Commissioner has ruled out a Europe-wide energy windfall tax. He said it was better done domestically. There is no point in the Minister for Finance hiding behind the skirts of the European Union. It said, as of Tuesday, that it is not planning to do this and that it is best done at domestic level. These companies are raking it in. Households will be fleeced by nearly double-digit increases in gas and electricity from Monday, the day before the budget. One million houses will, within a week, see their electricity and gas prices increase and the Minister is hiding behind something the European Commission is telling us, the public, that it is not planning to do and that would be better done domestically. Will the Minister look at introducing a windfall tax on the excess profits these energy companies are making while ordinary people are put to the pin of their collar trying to keep warm and keep the lights on this winter?
My position is extraordinarily clear. I heard that individual Commissioner's comments today. I met with Commissioner Hoekstra yesterday, who is the Commissioner with responsibility for taxation. He is due to report and engage with EU finance Ministers in Luxembourg next Friday.
It is not only my view but the view of the German finance Minister, the Italian finance Minister and four other finance Ministers, expressed in a signed letter to me, that the best way to consider acting on this is at an EU level. That is how we acted in this House in the past, as the Deputy will recall, at the start of the war in Ukraine. Due to the interconnectedness of the EU energy market, it makes sense to look at these things as a European Union. Of course, there are things we can and will do domestically and we will outline a number of those in the budget. Regarding the windfall energy tax, I am clear on the Government's position, and I am also clear on the position of many of my EU counterparts, that working together at an EU level is the right way to go. That is why we will formally be discussing this in Luxembourg on Friday week.
It is the energy Commissioner who made the point that there will be no windfall tax at a European level. That is the wrong position - I absolutely agree on that - but in this Parliament, the Minister, as the Minister for Finance, can bring one in if he wants. He can tax the excess profits. We are talking not about the profits but about the supernormal profits that energy companies are making. He should tax them at a rate of 75%. Why? It is because they should not be making these types of profits while people are being pushed to the pin of their collar and we are seeing double-digit increases in gas and electricity prices. It is immoral that energy companies are making these types of profits. As the Minister for Finance, the Tánaiste would have the back of ordinary Irish people if he stood up and said he was going to make sure these excess profits are taxed and that that tax would be redirected back into people's pockets and to households right across the State to help them with their electricity and gas bills. That is a decision that he could make today if he wanted to. Will he consider that?
The Deputy keeps asking me the same questions. I have the back of ordinary workers. We tested that electorally in Galway West not that long ago when the Deputy's party put its proposition and I put mine. We won the by-election and his party did not. We have tested these propositions with the people because the people of Ireland know that, of course, it is more nuanced than the Deputy outlined. We are in the European Union. Energy is extraordinarily interconnected across the European Union. That is why it is not just my view, but the view of multiple governments of a whole variety of different political persuasions - some of the right, some of the left and some of the centre - that the best way to consider these issues is at a European level. That is not a new phenomenon in this House. It is also what we did when we previously introduced measures at the start of Russia's brutal illegal invasion of Ukraine.
We will continue to work on how best to deal with windfall profits. I share the Deputy's analysis of the situation on the windfall profits and how we best deal with that. We will continue to do that at European level. Domestically, we will continue as a Government to have the backs of ordinary workers. That is why we have brought in packages of measures that far exceed what most other European countries have done. We have an ability to do that because of our good management of the economy.
Banking Sector
Cian O'Callaghan
Question:116. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the action his Department is taking to address the continued tracker mortgage and consumer protection issues arising from the transfer of mortgages (details supplied). [68857/26]
What actions is the Minister's Department taking to address the continued tracker mortgage and consumer protection issues arising from the transfer of mortgages from KBC to the Bank of Ireland? I have spoken recently to a family who have recently lost their home because of overcharging both by KBC and Bank of Ireland. What action is the Department taking to address this?
Tracker mortgage failings by lenders have caused significant distress. That phrase probably does not quite capture the level of distress. In some cases, it has had devastating consequences for the affected customers. The Central Bank of Ireland launched the tracker mortgage examination in 2015. This followed engagement and intervention with a number of lenders when it became clear that tracker-related issues could be industry-wide. The tracker mortgage examination was the largest, most complex and most significant consumer protection review ever undertaken by our Central Bank. It involved an initial review of more than 2 million mortgage accounts by lenders. The aim of the tracker mortgage examination was to put in place a framework that ensured lenders identified and put impacted customers back in the position they would have been in if the lenders' failings had not occurred. This required lenders to examine the extent to which they had met their contractual obligations to tracker mortgage customers and to examine the transparency of their communications with customers in relation to tracker-related issues.
The tracker mortgage examination was designed in a way which allowed affected customers, after they had received redress and compensation, to continue to have options to appeal. This could be done to the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman and to the courts. Over the course of its work, the Central Bank produced regular progress updates and published its final supervisory report in 2019, which is available on its website. It also concluded seven enforcement investigations against lenders with tracker mortgage failings. The Central Bank of Ireland advises that, at the end of June 2025, circa 42,000 customer accounts were impacted across 11 lenders in the tracker mortgage examination. Circa €750 million has been paid in redress and compensation to impacted customers. The Central Bank also advises that more than 99% of redress and compensation due to impacted customers identified in the tracker mortgage examination has concluded and compensation has been paid. Remaining cases are understood to be due in the main to uncontactable customers.
The Central Bank has also indicated that it continues to monitor the outcomes of any complaints, appeals and court cases and has communicated to lenders the expectation that they must fully consider whether any individual customer issues arising could have the potential to impact more widely. The Central Bank's consumer protection code applies in full to all lenders and all mortgages.
In the case in question, this is not an uncontactable customer. The family took out a tracker mortgage with KBC. For years, the bank charged them the wrong rate, which KBC eventually admitted to. When KBC left the Irish market in 2023, the family's mortgage was transferred to Bank of Ireland. The overcharging did not stop. It carried on under Bank of Ireland. The customer wrote to Bank of Ireland's CEO and asked to meet, but the bank refused. Instead, the arrears letters kept coming, as did the repossession warnings. In the end, the customer was being overcharged to the point where he could afford the mortgage. He was forced to sell his family home. This had a devastating impact. I have written to the CEO of Bank of Ireland raising this case, and I have yet to receive a response. Does the Minister accept that there could be many more people in this loan book affected by overcharging? Will he, as Minister for Finance, ask the Central Bank to examine how incorrect balances from redemption figures persisted after years of tracker remediation and how many other customers are affected?
Obviously, I will not comment on an individual mortgage situation, and the Deputy is not asking me to comment on it. I appreciate that is not the point he is raising in the Dáil tonight. "Yes" is the short answer to his question. I will ask the Central Bank of Ireland to specifically look at the issue the Deputy has raised. If he wishes to either copy me on that correspondence or send me other correspondence outlining the situation, I would be very happy to speak to the Governor of the Central Bank and ask the Central Bank to engage with the Deputy directly. The figures that are available to me, which I am sharing with the House and are available to the Deputy, show robust action by the Central Bank across a whole variety of lenders - 11 of them - affecting over 42,000 customers, with over €750 million paid in redress and compensation in what was the biggest examination ever carried out by the Central Bank on this issue. It was the largest, most complex and most significant consumer protection review. If the Deputy has, as he clearly does, some information that he would like the Central Bank to consider beyond that individual case and to provide an assurance, I would be very happy to seek to do that for him.
I welcome the Minister's response that he will contact the Central Bank about this wider issue and ask it to examine it. I am not just raising a specific case. This is an example and if this has affected the family in question, there could well be a very significant number of others in the loan book that was transferred who are similarly affected. That warrants investigation by the Central Bank. I welcome the Minister's commitment that he will contact the Central Bank about that. If he needs more information, I will certainly engage with him and pass it on.
I certainly will. For the record of the House, I do not have any information at my disposal in relation to that wider issue or the potential for a wider issue. However, considering that the Deputy has raised the matter on the floor of the Dáil, I will send a transcript of this exchange to the Central Bank. If I or the Central Bank requires any further information, I will ask it to come back to the Deputy. I will report back to the Deputy once I have received an update from the Central Bank.
Tax Collection
Pearse Doherty
Question:117. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will outline the estimated cost to the State of vulture funds using structures like IREFs to avoid paying taxes on rental income. [68615/26]
Within a stone's throw of this Dáil, there are apartments owned by vulture funds. They charge over €3,000 for a two-bedroom apartment and the Government lets them off without paying a penny in tax on their rental income. Hundreds of thousands of euro are being fleeced from renters right across this city and elsewhere and the Minister of Finance does not ask these funds to pay a penny of corporation tax on their rental income. Is the Minister going to continue to adopt that position, which is against his officials' advice, that there should be a tax applied on these funds?
Until December 2016, income and gains arising on Irish real estate and distributed by certain Irish regulated funds to non-resident investors were outside the scope of Irish taxation. The Irish real estate fund, or IREF, regime was introduced in the Finance Act 2016 to address concerns that non-resident investors who were making investments in collective investment funds were not taxed on income and gains from Irish property. That was the starting point in relation to the regime the Deputy referenced.
The regime is predominantly a withholding tax regime that applies to an Irish fund where 25% or more of the value of the assets in a fund is derived from Irish property, such as land and buildings. Where the profits of the IREF are transferred to a non-resident investor, the IREF is generally required to apply IREF withholding tax at a rate of 20%. There are exemptions from IREF withholding tax for certain investors, for example, where an investor is a domestic, EU or EEA equivalent pension scheme, investment fund or life assurance company.
These categories of investors are generally associated with collective, widely held investment. Exemptions are in line with international taxing norms. They are necessary to prevent double taxation in the hands of the ultimate individual investor, and it is a wider policy objective to support financial security through long-term investments such as pensions and life assurance policies.
In order to prevent instances where exemptions from IREF withholding tax intended for collective investment are inappropriately used for personal investment, the IREF legislation contains complex anti-avoidance measures referred to as the personal portfolio IREF rules. The IREF regime also contains a suite of other anti-avoidance measures which protect the Exchequer from abuses. IREFs are not obliged to separately report the source of the profits on the IREF return as the value passing to the investor is the reference point for taxation under the tax regime. While the financial statements filed by IREFs contain high-level detail of the profits generated by IREFs, the profits of an IREF may arise from various activities including, for example, investment income, property development, property sales and rental income. Some IREFs also engage in non-property related activities. In the absence of a breakdown of the source of the profits, I am advised that Revenue is not in a position to provide an estimated cost for the Deputy. As the Deputy knows, I intend to carry out-----
Go raibh maith agat.
I will come back on this.
I am well aware of the IREF regime. The record will show it was me who campaigned to bring it in in 2016, just as it was me who had to force the Government to bring in the renters' tax credit and the mortgage interest relief that it continued to argue against but finally started to see sense on. This is the issue here. I have continued to campaign on this point. Just think about this: there are two-bedroom apartments a stone's throw from this building, from our national Parliament, and their owners are charging €3,000 rent and the Government allows them not to pay a penny in tax on that rental income. If that apartment was owned by the Chairperson or anybody else out there, they would have to pay 25% corporation tax on the rental income. If it was owned by a private company, they would have to pay tax on it. However, because it is vulture fund, an institutional investor, Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and the Independents allow them not to pay a penny in tax on the eye-watering rents they are crippling young people and older people with in this city and beyond. It is scandalous. Worse is-----
Go raibh maith agat, a Theachta.
-----that the Government's officials have called for a tax to be introduced. It is there in black and white.
Tá an t-am caite.
There is no point in the Minister shaking his head. It is there in black and white. The officials have called for a tax to be introduced.
Go raibh maith agat. Glaoim ar an Tánaiste.
Will the Minister finally do the right thing?
Go raibh maith agat, a Theachta.
Will he tax the vulture funds on the rent they are collecting?
Let the record of the House show that it was a government led by my party in 2016 that introduced the legislation and legislated in relation to these issues. Just to be clear. I know the Deputy does this thing about Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael for the social media clips, but let the record of the House show that it was a Fine Gael Minister for Finance who actually legislated in relation to the IREF legislation. The reason I read out the lengthy answers at the start of this is because the Deputy distorts the situation and frames the debate in a certain way. The IREF was actually introduced, as the Deputy has said, and, in fairness, as he acknowledged and campaigned for, to address concerns that non-resident investors who were making investments and collective investment funds were not taxed on income and gains from Irish property. However, there is an issue - again, I do not think the Deputy should speak for my officials - in relation to double taxation. In the answer I have given this House I have very clearly outlined that. Therefore, we gave a commitment that we were going to carry out a consultation in relation to simplifying the IREF regime, something the Deputy says he looked for to be introduced in 2016. We intend to carry out a consultation to see what improvements and simplifications need to be made and I intend to publish that consultation this year.
Go raibh maith agat, a Thánaiste.
I have the documentation. The Minister's officials have recommended a tax at the level of the fund. They have recommended a rate of that tax. A tax of that nature could bring in a quarter of a billion euro. Does the Minister know what he could do with a quarter of a billion euro? He could do what Sinn Féin is proposing, that is, to double the renters' tax credit and put €2,000 into every renter's pocket across the State to help them as they are being fleeced by the landlords the Government protected over many years. Does he know what else he should do along with that? He should make sure he bans further rent increases. That is the type of policies we are putting forward. To go back to the core of this, there are people who are ripping their tenants off with these type of eye-watering rents of thousands of euro, and they are not paying a penny tax on that rent. If I am the landlord, I have to pay tax; if it is a company down the road, it has to pay tax; but if it is a vulture fund or institutional investor, they pay no corporation tax on that rental income. It should stop-----
Sin é, a Theachta. Tá an t-am caite.
The Department officials have recommended that the Minister bring in a tax.
Will he actually-----
A Theachta Doherty, tá an t-am caite.
-----take a side that is not the side of the vulture fund in this case?
Again, it was Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil in government that introduced the renters' tax credit. It was Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil-----
Oh my God.
No, sorry. You get to say your thing and I do not say "Oh my God", so just sit there and allow me answer these-----
Who pushed you into it?
Just to be very clear-----
Who forced you into it?
There is one speaker.
I just do not understand. If the Deputy is so effective at his job-----
I am-----
-----I do not understand why he is sitting over there as the longest-serving Opposition spokesperson on finance in the history of the European Union. Maybe reflect on that for a moment. We introduced the renters' tax-----
Still larger than Fine Gael for the past two elections.
There is only one speaker and the Tánaiste has the floor.
We are here and you are there-----
Still. Good luck to you.
-----and that is for a reason called democracy.
We introduced the renters' tax credit. We increased the renters' tax credit. The programme for Government commits to further increasing the renters' tax credit. It is now worth more than €300 million to renters in this country. We also introduced rent pressure zones, including providing protections to renters in Donegal, that did not exist until we brought in those rent pressure zones. There are specific issues - and this does not suit the Deputy's quick social media clips - in relation to double taxation. We want investment to come into this country, we want more homes to be built, we want more apartments to be built and we want more rental properties for people. There are specific issues in relation to double taxation which we need to work our way through.
Go raibh maith agat.
That is why we will publish this year a consultation on a simplified IREF regime.
More consultation. Why not act?
Glaoim ar an Teachta Ged Nash-----
Why not act? It is because you have are in bed with the vultures. That is the reality.
That is a slur.
It is the truth.
-----without interruption.
Exchequer Returns
Ged Nash
Question:118. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance to provide details of the impact assessments undertaken on Exchequer revenues in relation to the proposed savings and investment account. [68940/26]
Has the Tánaiste carried out an impact assessment in terms of the Exchequer related to his proposed saving and investment accounts proposition, and where that is at? I expect we will hear more about this and the details around the proposal in next week's budget, but at this point will he confirm that an assessment of the impact on the Exchequer has taken place, and if he is prepared to publish that assessment?
I thank Deputy Nash. The introduction of the investment account is a key step in fostering a stronger culture of long-term investment in our country and supporting greater financial resilience over time for individuals and families. We want to provide a simple, accessible and attractive framework for investment. The investment account will help individuals to put their savings to work, strengthen their economic resilience by helping people build assets, prepare for future financial needs, and improve their ability of our citizens to withstand economic shocks. It also contributes to the broader piece of work going on in deepening Europe's and Ireland's capital markets. While many of the parameters of the investment account have been shared and published in the roadmap on the taxation of retail investment this summer, a number of aspects, as the Deputy rightly suggests, will be announced on budget day, including the tax-free threshold, the flat rate of tax that will apply and the maximum amount you can contribute to an account in one year. In that context, final estimates of initial costs to the Exchequer on the introduction of the investment account will be provided as part of budget 2027. We will also provide, as the Deputy seeks, an economic impact assessment of the proposed investment account. The assessment uses a modified version of the dynamic representative agent model developed by the European Commission. The model has been adjusted to incorporate Irish parameters and data. It examines the potential impact of the proposed account on household investment, wealth accumulation, consumption and Exchequer revenues over a 20-year period. It compares the introduction of the account with a baseline in which there is no policy change. The analysis uses Irish household wealth data from the European Central Bank and income data from the Central Statistics Office. It also takes account of international experiences. In addition, the staff working document published with the European Commission's recommendation on savings and investment accounts in 2025 considered the potential fiscal impact of introducing investment accounts on member states at the EU level and suggests that these changes would have a positive economic impact. To cut a long story short, yes, we will publish it, and it will be published in advance of this House considering legislation and the detail of that legislation, so that we will then have an opportunity to tease through it together.
I expect then, from what the Tánaiste is saying, we will see more details next week in the budget but that a lot of the tax-related matters will be addressed in the context of the Finance Bill that we will be dealing with in early November. Figures published by the IBEC group, Financial Services Ireland, would suggest that there will be a conservative 10% adult uptake. It applies a €30,000 tax-free annual allowance so that is probably a threshold that has been inserted into the media and with which we are familiar. It said that its first-year cost estimate would be approximately €54 million in foregone tax receipts. Is that an estimate that is familiar to the Government? Is that the baseline on which it is working? I would find it useful if the Tánaiste could establish, given his clear interest in this issue - he has been interested in this issue for some time now - an assessment in terms of the number of savers who may take up the opportunity to engage in this form of an account in the first year or two.
These are very fair questions. I am very happy to engage with them and we should engage with them in detail through the Finance Bill piece.
While we have seen a significant uptake in these accounts in a number of member states that have introduced them, I do not see this as a kind of light bulb or light switch moment. I see this more as a cultural change in terms of finance and investment that we will be on over a number of years and, if and when this works, I see this as being a moment that we will look back on in ten, 15 or 20 years, perhaps a bit like auto-enrolment, and see that it made a real and meaningful difference.
We need to make these decisions as a collective in government, but I expect the Exchequer impact, and I want to thank the Minister of State, Deputy Troy, for his work on this, to be very modest in the first year. I expect the economic assessment that I will publish to show the positive impact that this will have, which would also be in line with what the European Commission has found when it has looked at it on a member state level.
I have tried to put quite a lot on the record of the House in terms of the various information and methodology that we are following in terms of public finances. We want to get this right but the threshold-----
Go raibh maith agat, a Aire.
Sorry, my apologies.
There is probably never a good time to launch an initiative like this given with what is happening with the US Treasury at the moment. In addition, given the kind of investment that will take place because of the products available such as bonds, exchange-traded funds, ETFs, shares and so on, it may not be the best time ever to do it.
I will be straight with the Minister. I do not see this in the scheme of things as being a priority. It is something that will happen. It has to happen. I understand why people will want the money that they have on deposit in bank accounts that is not earning an awful lot in interest at the moment to work harder for them, but I have said it before and I will say it again, it may very well be a bit of a minority sport. The reality is that people who may be watching in this evening and people who are following Dáil proceedings, this will be the last thing on their mind during a cost-of-living crisis when they are finding it hard to pay the bills.
I have no issue with the principle of it. It very much aligns with the objectives of the European Union in terms of savings and investments, capital markets and so on. I have no issue with that, but there will be tax foregone. It may ultimately prove to be beneficial to our economy and society but time will tell.
I very much agree that time will tell is a fair analysis of the situation, and I appreciate that the Deputy does not have an ideological or principled objection to it. I also appreciate that this House will want to get the detail right and will want to tease through that.
I fully accept that we are living through a cost-of-living crisis and I fully accept that that it is real, but alongside that there is data from the CSO published only in the past month that shows that Irish people are continuing to save in many cases. They are small amounts, and this is not the Government or the Oireachtas telling them to open an investment account, but for those people trying to set aside very small amounts and a few bob, we want them to be able have the same opportunities, and quite frankly they do not at the moment because the tax system has been too complex. People have had to be a tax expert or a wealthy person to be able to avail of investments. Over time I might be able to convince the Deputy that this is something that the labour movement and the Government can align on in terms of it actually being something that is fundamentally good for ordinary workers.
However, I fully accept that this is not in any way being put forward by the Government as a response to the cost-of-living crisis but more actually to building up economic resilience over time for households.
Tax Code
Pearse Doherty
Question:119. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will consider further measures on excise duty to reduce the cost of petrol and diesel. [68617/26]
The price of diesel is well above €2 per litre at the pumps right across this State, and at many of them it as high as €2.20. I am sure that the Tánaiste has noticed that. It is hammering people who have no alternative to driving. For many people in rural areas, their car is their connection and lifeline. They simply cannot do without it, whether it is going to work or dropping the kids to school. Does the Tánaiste accept that the situation has got worse since the Dáil was recalled? Does he accept that there is now a need for further intervention to reduce the cost at the pumps in the scale of further reductions in excise?
I fully and factually have to accept that the price of diesel and petrol has risen further since the Dáil was recalled. That is a statement of fact and there is an onus on all of us in this House to work in a constructive fashion in terms of more proposals and ideas that we can consider together.
Faced with the sudden rise in global energy prices, we have taken a number of actions. We have taken actions that did reduce the price as to what it otherwise would have been at the pumps. We have provided targeted assistance for vulnerable households. We have introduced financial support for critical sectors with acute exposure to high fuel prices. We also have to continue, and we saw more measures today from the Minister Climate, Energy and the Environment, Deputy O’Brien, in relation to vital long-term investment to try to help people who are genuinely trying to transition but need support in terms of that, whether it is replacing the boiler or putting solar panels on the house.
We have seen over €1.3 billion in measures targeted at households, farmers, agricultural contractors, hauliers, and businesses. The Government has delivered one of the largest, if not the largest, support packages in the EU per capita. As we finalise the budget for next week, we are extremely conscious of the pressure that people are under when it comes to energy costs and energy prices.
We are actively endeavouring to advance a number of issues to provide assistance and certainty to people when it comes to energy, including on excise, and I have already signalled this.
We have got to be honest with people, and I think the Deputy accepts this, that there is no government in the world that can absorb all of the impact of the global energy shock. We have already temporarily reduced the mineral oil tax applying to petrol, auto diesel and marked gas oil, MGO. Inclusive of the reduction in the NORA levy, these changes save consumers and businesses 27 cent per litre of petrol, 32 cent per litre of auto diesel and 7.4 cent per litre of MGO.
It is perhaps because of those reasons that when I attended a meeting of the budgetary oversight committee last week, I was able to print out an article from the Euronews website that showed while diesel and petrol prices are still very high in Ireland, we were not featuring in the top ten in the European Union for petrol or diesel as of last week. I need to check them again this week. I am just making the point that the interventions are making a difference.
I have been very clear. We are not going to be a position to restore those excise measures in November as previously outlined, and we will be bringing forward more proposals to provide certainty for the winter in next month’s budget.
I have said it numerous times. We cannot control the international price of a barrel of oil. We cannot control what happens in the Middle East or in the Strait of Hormuz, but what we can control in this House is the amount of tax we apply to petrol and diesel. When people are driving up to their petrol stations and they are being charged €2.20 for a litre of diesel and they need that car and the diesel in their tank to go to work, drop the kids to school, visit their mother or whatever, then that pressure is too much.
The resources are in the State. We can all accept that. The resources are in the State to help people at this time of need. I am putting it to the Tánaiste very clearly. When these prices are this high, the Government needs to go further. It has the ability to reduce excise further on petrol and diesel. It can do that. It can do it on the budget day, if it wants, which is only a couple of days away. It should have done it before this, but I am asking the Minister whether the Government will consider reducing excise further or petrol and diesel. It is a simple question. Is that under consideration?
Quite frankly, we are considering the whole issue of energy in the round. We need to be truthful with people. I am not suggesting that the Deputy is not. We need to be truthful with people in relation to things like EU directives and how far we have gone. In fact, we have gone further, as the Deputy knows, than the EU directives and sought derogations in some cases already. We have also got to be honest with people, who rightly want us to be able to do a whole variety of things in the budget next week, that there is a limit to what we can do and what any government can do in relation to energy.
At the moment, as profiled by the financial resolutions passed in this House, the excise cuts are due to be reversed starting in November. That will not happen. As a Government, we have agreed to provide clarity and certainty for people for the winter months. There are also other pressing issues that the Deputy and others have highlighted around home heating oil, gas and perhaps the carbon tax that is applied in relation to that. There are limits in relation to that too under the ETS2 derogation, but there is room to do stuff.
There are lots of ways of helping people with energy and cost of living and some of them are not related to energy, such as things like income tax proposals and childcare costs. People do not look at what they have at the end of the week or month based on which Department did what. They look at the overall package that the Government brings forward and we will bring forward a range of cost-of-living measures next week.
I told the Minister a couple of weeks ago that the Government's plan to reintroduce excise on petrol and diesel was nuts. Putting up carbon tax in two weeks' time in October and then further on 1 November is absolute bonkers. That is why we voted against it. Let us be clear: the Government will get no pats on the back from people for saying "I am not making your lives worse." What people expect from a Government is of course that not to make things harder, but when diesel and petrol prices are high, and the diesel price is €2.20 per litre, they want the Government to use some of the resources that workers collectively across this State have created. They want the Government to use the additional VAT that was brought into the Government's coffers, including €300 million more than expected at the end of August because prices are so high, to reduce excise further.
The Minister did not answer the question. He said that the Government is looking at everything in the context of energy. My question was not about energy broadly. My question is about petrol and diesel. Workers and families want to know whether the Government understands the pressure they are under. Is the Government considering further excise reductions on petrol and diesel?
Where the Deputy and I have disagreed on this, and we have disagreed on a few points, is that the Government has taken the approach, which we actually think is the right approach, to be agile and nimble, locking in decisions for long periods, when, with the greatest of respect, the Deputy or I did not know what was going to happen the Strait of Hormuz and whether it was going to get better or worse. The Deputy and I did not know that. Locking in taxpayers' money actually takes away the ability to be agile or nimble. We have shown every time as a Government that we have responded and respectfully the Deputy has suggested every time that we were going to put it back up but we have not. We are being agile and nimble. We are using taxpayers' money - we have to look at it in the round - to help people in the here and now.
What we have done with petrol and diesel has not just helped at the pumps. It has suppressed inflation in the economy by around 0.6%, so it has had a positive impact on food prices too.
Will the Tánaiste answer the question?
The answer to the question is that all of these are matters for budget day next Tuesday. The Government will consider all of them. The Deputy would not expect, because he has been at this a while, any other answer from me-----
If it is to one of the newspapers, the Tánaiste will leak like the Titanic.
Deputy, please.
He will leak like the Titanic.
Deputy, it is the Tánaiste's opportunity-----
I look forward to engaging-----
If there is a journalist in the corridor, he will tell him everything, but, by God, will he tell the Dáil-----
Deputies, the time for the question has expired.
-----or the people of Ireland who are worried about their fuel bills? If there are any journalists here, maybe we will get an answer to the question-----
We are moving on to-----
I read Siobhán Fenton's book recently.
-----an Teachta Tony McCormack.
She gave a very good insight into how Deputy Doherty performs in this House. I think it is on page 154.
An Teachta Tony McCormack, the floor is yours.
It is a good description. She says he is a nice man and just acts for the cameras.
Business Supports
Tony McCormack
Question:120. Deputy Tony McCormack asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance his plans to implement the recommendations of the cost of business advisory forum report that come under the remit of his Department. [68706/26]
Before I start, I would like to offer my sympathies to the family, friends and work colleagues of Mihai Chinez and Denisa Chinez, who lost their lives so tragically in a workplace accident yesterday at Banagher Precast Concrete.
What are the Minister's plans to implement the recommendations from the cost of business advisory forum report that relate to his Department?
I thank the Deputy for his question and echo his words of sympathy to the families who were bereaved yesterday.
The Government is conscious of the challenges facing all businesses in the current economic climate. The programme for Government sets out a range of commitments to support small and medium enterprises, SMEs, and promote innovation, economic growth and entrepreneurship while maintaining competitiveness. This is an ongoing process.
The report of the cost of business advisory forum was published on 28 August. This is an industry-led report. It was facilitated by the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment and established as one of the commitments under the programme for Government to examine the factors contributing to the cost of doing business in Ireland and identify practical measures to improve competitiveness. The forum brought together business representative bodies from retail and tourism to agriculture and the multinational sector, alongside Departments and State agencies. It was designed to facilitate a solution-focused dialogue between businesses, policymakers, regulators and experts who have insight into the factors driving the rising costs of business in Ireland. A number of meetings of the forum have taken place since its establishment in June 2025. These focused on insurance costs, regulation and planning, water services, legal costs, regulation and compliance and banking, payments and financial services. The report contains 63 recommendations aimed at reducing business costs, strengthening competitiveness and easing regulatory burdens. A number of these come within my Department’s remit.
My colleague the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment has contacted the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance, Deputy Harris, as well as other relevant Ministers to assess the feasibility, resource implications and potential impacts of individual recommendations and identify priorities for action. The Government is are committed to progressing practical measures that reduce the cost of doing business, enhance competitiveness and support a favourable operating environment for SMEs and enterprise. I am advised that the forum will reconvene in January 2027 to review progress made to date.
I welcome this report and the 63 recommendations it contains. I also welcome the commitments outlined by the Minister of State to identify practical measures that can reduce the cost of doing business. A number of these recommendations fall within the remit of the Department of Finance. They could make a real difference, particularly to small businesses. I ask the Minister of State to give us an indication of the priorities within his Department and what practical progress he would like to see made before the forum meets again in January.
I thank the Deputy and acknowledge his interest in and advocacy for SMEs. Indeed, as my party's spokesperson, he has been to the fore in raising the issues facing SMEs, not just in his own constituency but across Ireland. His own experience as an SME operator means that he can speak with real authority in terms of the challenges facing SMEs. It is important that we listen to people like him who are operating businesses and who understand the challenges.
One of the key issues that falls under my area of responsibility is ensuring reduced insurance costs for businesses. We did considerable work in the lifetime of the previous Government in terms of the action plan on insurance costs, publishing the personal injury guidelines, bringing down the cost of claims and enhancing the role of the Injuries Resolution Board and the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission in order to ensure that we create more competition in the insurance industry. Some 57% of SMEs are now paying less than €1,000 in annual insurance premia. A total of 90% of businesses are paying less than €5,000 in annual insurance premia.
I compliment the Minister of State and his Department on the work they have done on insurance. The cost of insurance was one of the main findings of the report. This is something that many businesses are under pressure with. I want to focus on one area that is particularly important for small businesses, which is access to credit. The report identifies limited competition in business banking and high borrowing costs as problems for small businesses. Access to affordable credit can decide whether businesses can buy equipment, take on another employee, invest in new technology or enter a new market. The forum recommends examining the case for a State SME bank. We already have State-backed structures that support business finance. Will the Minister of State ensure that this recommendation is properly assessed? More broadly, can we examine whether small businesses are actually getting enough affordable credit from the current system? We talk about helping Irish businesses to start, grow and become exporters, but access to finance is essential if we want that to happen.
I could not agree more, and that is something I advocated strongly for when I was a Minister of State in the Department of enterprise in the previous Government. Establishing a new State bank will be fully considered by my Department, including in the context of conducting any necessary further stakeholder consultation. I would like to draw the Deputy's attention to a large number of State supports that are currently in place to help SMEs to access credit. These include the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland, SBCI, Ireland's national promotional bank, which was established in 2014 to deliver financial supports that address failures in the Irish credit market while driving competition and innovation and ensuring the efficient use of available EU resources. The SBCI will have provided about €5 billion in lending to more than 66,000 SMEs to the end of 2026.
I would also point to recent changes to the credit union lending regulations by the Central Bank that are enabling credit unions to lend up to 15% of their assets to SMEs. That is an area in which I see real growth opportunities to support SMEs going forward.