Vol. 1091 No. 3
121. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance to report on the progress made on a new double taxation convention between the UK and Ireland with the aim of improving cross border labour mobility. [68631/26]
122. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance whether he intends to engage with the British Government on the issue of cross-Border workers, people who live in the North and work in the South, who face numerous tax anomalies. [68200/26]
Cross-Border working is an increasingly important feature in our all-island economy, with thousands of people crossing the Border every day to work. Brexit and the growth of remote and hybrid working have exposed practical difficulties for workers and employers dealing with two tax systems and different rules. Negotiations on a new double taxation convention between the Irish and British Governments present an important opportunity to simplify these arrangements. What progress has been made in these negotiations and when are they expected to conclude? What practical improvements will they deliver for cross-Border workers and for their employers?
I propose to take questions Nos. 121 and 122 together.
I thank Deputy Conway-Walsh for the question and for her ongoing engagement on this issue. This is a matter that I am determined to get done. I had a good discussion with the new Chancellor of the Exchequer in the UK, John Healy, on the matter when he was in Dublin for the informal ECOFIN meeting. The two questions concern cross-Border working on the island of Ireland. I can inform Deputy Conway-Walsh that progressing and enhancing the all-island labour market is a priority for me, my Department and the Government of Ireland.
The tax treatment associated with cross-Border working has been subject to ongoing discussions in recent years, particularly in light of the increase in remote working as a result of the pandemic. However, cross-Border working gives rise to complex issues involving shared taxing rights between different jurisdictions. There are potential issues for employees, employers, and Exchequer revenues, with a wide range of policy issues requiring consideration including around double non-taxation and the likes. There is also the need to respect long-established international tax principles. Nonetheless, it is absolutely necessary from an all-Ireland labour market perspective to find a satisfactory solution to the issue. I am pleased that the Irish and British Governments are committed to finding a solution.
Deputy Conway-Walsh will be aware that the second annual UK-Ireland Summit, which was held in Cork on 12 March, acknowledged and committed to this work being undertaken in order to address the complexities of the cross-Border issue. The joint statement that arose from that summit welcomed agreement to engage on reaching a decision on this issue and the commitment to reviewing a bilateral Ireland-UK approach to address concerns arising from hybrid cross-Border work.
Engagement on this matter between my departmental officials, Revenue officials and His Majesty's Revenue and Customs, HMRC, commenced in 2025 to facilitate an exchange of views, share experiences and consider recent developments in relation to cross-Border tax issues. Revenue and HMRC officials are currently considering various approaches in the context of a broader renegotiation of the double taxation agreement with the UK, with a view to finding a solution on cross-Border working and also to update and modernise the double taxation agreement, which is now almost 50 years old. The Deputy will be aware that the double taxation agreement is an international treaty. Such agreements are strictly confidential while under negotiation. As this particular agreement is still in the process of renegotiation, I cannot discuss further details of either the process or the substance of the negotiations other than to say that all double taxation agreements must be brought before the Oireachtas prior to ratification.
Revenue is aware of the uncertainty faced by employees and employers regarding the taxation of employment income. Where the employee can avail of a hybrid working engagement, he or she could live in one jurisdiction and work in the other. These are common daily realities for many people. The negotiations are at an advanced stage. I engaged recently in Dublin with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the progress. We are committed to finding a mutually acceptable solution to cross-Border hybrid working. While I cannot give the House a definitive timeline, I can say that the negotiations are going well and I expect we will bring them to a conclusion to everybody's satisfaction. I will keep the Deputy informed.
I appreciate that the Tánaiste cannot give the details here tonight. I am raising this issue because I want it to be an absolute priority. Ten years on from the Brexit referendum, cross-Border workers are still dealing every day with uncertainty and complexity. In excess of 18,000 workers crossed the Border, along with €17 billion in trade, in 2025. We need to make it as seamless as possible for workers and employers.
A few months ago, we spoke in this Chamber about the fiscal implications of a united Ireland. Here we have the fiscal implications of partition on our island. People living on one side of the Border and working on the other can find themselves navigating two tax administrations alongside different rules on social protection, pensions and employment rights. Where somebody works from home for part of the week, questions can arise around tax liabilities and employer obligations. This creates uncertainty, not only for workers, but also for businesses that might otherwise recruit people from across the Border. We should be making it easier to live, work and employ people on an all-island basis, rather than allowing administrative barriers to discourage labour mobility.
I agree with that fully. While we are here talking, quite rightly, about an all-island economy and the better shared future we want to build, I am conscious of the very tense situation in the North tonight. With the Taoiseach, I engaged on that today with the Deputy's party leader and with Michelle O'Neill. We are all thinking tonight of a community in which people are feeling a sense of trauma and retraumatisation. Nobody ever wants to see us brought back to the previous time. It would be odd to have the conversation arising out of these questions without acknowledging that context and backdrop.
The Deputy is right that there is too much conversation in the media of what is nearly a gotcha question as to how much a unified island would cost. There would also be huge benefits from an all-island economy. I welcome her constructive engagement on the discussion we had in this House on the dynamic effects. There would be some upfront costs, of course, but there also would be huge benefits. The idea of having to give one figure for the cost is not helpful. I try to put useful data on the record of the House.
In the here and now, as we prepare to build our shared future and, I hope, a unified island into the future, there are practical issues arising for cross-Border workers. There are people who live on one side of the Border and work on the other. There are people working some days on one side of the Border and some days on the other. We need to fix this issue and get it right. It is a personal priority for me and for my Department, and also for Revenue from a practical point of view. In fairness, I think it is also a priority for the UK Treasury. It is an outcome of the UK-Ireland summit in Cork last year. I am committed to getting it done and we want it done as quickly as possible. The fact that we are also doing some broader work is not to delay that. The double taxation agreement review is also a good thing in terms of east-west processes. I will let the Deputy know as soon as we have progress on that. Both the Chancellor of the Exchequer and I have noted the good progress that is being made.
I, too, send solidarity to the residents of the Garvaghy Road. What is happening there is an absolute disgrace. I appeal to the Tánaiste, as a member of the Government and leader of his party, to get the Taoiseach and the Government to act immediately. We cannot let this continue. We know what needs to be done. There will be no march down the Garvaghy Road. People need to understand that. The Secretary of State must play the role he has to play in this as co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement. We met the residents here last week. What they have been put through is not right, and it is not right for it to continue another day. We cannot be spectators in this. The Government has a role to play, as does the British Government. There must be intervention. There is no way that the Parades Commission should ever have made that decision. It was totally wrong, and it was a wrong done to every person on this island.
The Parades Commission got this extraordinarily wrong. I am very clear on that. There has been good engagement with the Deputy's party leader and with Michelle O'Neill in her capacity as party vice president. To be fair to everybody, the Taoiseach is extraordinarily engaged on this issue; of that there is absolutely no doubt. My colleague, the Minister for foreign affairs, is in the North this evening. We are engaging closely with the Deputy's party colleagues.
I, too, had the opportunity to meet the Garvaghy Road residents when they were here last week. What really struck me was that they are decent people who all have simply worked far too hard for far too long to ever go back to the situation of the past. The Deputy will know this, because she has been up there with the community, but they told me of the young people who had grown up expecting this conflict to be just a distant memory. We are never going back and we cannot go back.
The most important thing in the here and now is that space be created. I do not want to say anything to cut across that process other than that we are, and will remain, very engaged as a Government and as co-guarantors of a peace agreement that so many people have worked so hard to get to this point. I heard a woman speaking on "Morning Ireland" this morning who is a Garvaghy Road resident. She talked about how her children were growing up playing with children from another community tradition in a way that would not have been imaginable in the past. Even if this issue ended today, and we all hope it does, there is a level of trauma and retraumatisation that is real after the events of the past few days. We will all have to work together on that in the time ahead.
We continue to work together in a sensible, all-island way to resolve the taxation issue for the future. There are very practical implications for people, regardless of their political tradition. We can do much better for cross-Border workers and I am determined to bring the matter to a close.
123. Deputy Louis O'Hara asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance to outline the amount of carbon tax collected for the years 2024, 2025 and to date in 2026. [68497/26]
Will the Tánaiste outline the amount of carbon tax collected in 2024, 2025 and to date in 2026 and how he proposes to support householders who have borne the brunt of continuing increases in that tax in recent years?
I thank the Deputy for his question. The carbon tax has been a central pillar of Ireland's climate policy framework. It has provided a clear and credible long-term signal in terms of our work as a country to transition away from fossil fuels and move towards a low-carbon economy.
Provision was introduced in the Finance Act 2020 to provide for annual increases in carbon tax rates up to May 2030. Carbon tax rates on petrol and auto-diesel are generally legislated to increase at budget time each year up to 2029, with the increase delayed until 1 May for all other fuels up to 2030. In April, the Government deferred the 1 May 2026 carbon tax increase on home heating fuels and marked gas oil, MGO, until October in light of the extraordinary circumstances and increased fuel prices created by the conflict in the Middle East. I am advised by Revenue that the amount of carbon tax collected was €1.067 billion in 2024 and €1.176 billion in 2025. The provisional figure to the end of August this year was €866 million.
Revenues raised from the carbon tax are allocated for expenditure on just transition and climate-positive measures, including funding social welfare measures, agri-environmental schemes and retrofitting programmes. The net impact of the combined measures funded by the carbon tax has consistently been shown to be progressive. As of budget 2026, the Government has allocated over €4.2 billion in carbon tax revenue for those purposes since 2020. Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, analysis consistently shows that the lower income deciles are better off as a result of the social protection measures funded by the increased carbon tax.
The Government remains committed to our climate action policy, which includes the carbon tax. However, we took the decision to pause the 1 May increase to help alleviate fuel price pressures being faced by households and businesses. In budget 2026, €1.114 billion was allocated to climate action measures and to ensure the most vulnerable were protected from the unintended impacts of the increase.
I will make one further point in the interests of fully informing the House.
As the Deputy has heard me say before, we published a tax strategy group paper over the summer. It outlined different ways one could consider the carbon tax reforms that could be made. We are considering that in the round and I have particularly signalled that changes be considered for kerosene and gas.
Households across the State are under massive pressure at the moment when it comes to the cost of filling their car and heating their homes. In terms of home heating oil, we brought forward proposals on eight different occasions just this year to remove the carbon tax on home heating oil, but the Government has opposed that on every single occasion. There has been no reduction of carbon tax or excise duty on home heating oil this year, while prices have gone through the roof. Over the past number of years, we have seen successive Governments heap more upward pressure on the cost of home heating fuels, petrol and diesel through continued carbon tax increases, and there are further ones planned all the way through to 2030. The carbon tax is a regressive tax which forces the most vulnerable and disadvantaged households in this State to pay a premium. These are households that very often have no other alternatives available to them. The ongoing fuel price crisis shows us that when the cost of fuel and home heating oil increases, it is the most vulnerable and most disadvantaged people who feel the impact the most. The ongoing increases are going to further exacerbate that inequality. When will the Tánaiste finally acknowledge this reality, stop pretending that high carbon tax and tax increases are working, and give households a break?
I appreciate that when it comes its application, the carbon tax is not equally felt by all citizens. I take the point that the data shows that those living in rural Ireland are twice as likely to use home heating oil as a fuel source - as an example - as those living in larger towns and cities. According to the latest available CSO figures, around 26% of households in Ireland use it as their main heating fuel, so that is probably around half a million households. The Government understands that these are disproportionately older households, disproportionately rural, and in a lot of cases, lower income households as well. Many households are eligible for the fuel allowance. We extended it by four weeks earlier this year, meaning that close to 470,000 households will have benefited from additional payments, totalling €152 per household. The fuel allowance season has now commenced for this winter period. I am also conscious that there are those who use home heating oil who do not qualify for the payments, so the upcoming budget will consider all of these issues in the round.
We would also have to consider - I think the Deputy is endeavouring to do this too - that we stay on the right side of the ETS2 derogation. We do not want any unintended consequences in relation to any changes that may be brought forward.
The Tánaiste says that he understands but this year he has not done anything on home heating oil. He has not reduced the excise duty or the carbon tax on that at a time when prices have increased massively. We all understand that prices have increased because of the conflict in the Middle East. The Government still had options available to it to alleviate that pressure for households, but it has simply chosen not to do so. That needs to happen as a matter of urgency. The Government needs to completely remove the carbon tax from home heating oil to give households a break. Carbon tax increases need to be taken off the table. In the context of the prices we have at the moment and people, especially in rural Ireland, not having the alternatives available to them, it is totally unjustifiable for the Government to continue to proceed with these increases. They should be taken off the table. What choice does a person have if they are renting and their landlord does not want to get rid of the oil tank? What choice does a person have in rural Ireland where there is no public transport available to them, where they have to put petrol or diesel in the car? They cannot afford an expensive electric vehicle. These tax increases are anti-rural. They disproportionately impact low-income households and the Government needs to acknowledge that reality. Remove the carbon tax completely from home heating oil. Cut the tax on petrol and diesel as well to continue to give people a break, because households cannot sustain any more increases.
We can have a difference of view on this. We have taken a number of measures to try to help people with energy and fuel supports. It is probably the largest in the European Union per capita. I agree with the Deputy on the point that not everybody is in a position to change their home heating oil tank. I think particularly of older people as well. It just simply might not work for people. Quite frankly, there is a difference between saying do not increase the taxes versus a complete abolition of the tax. We need to operate in this space while being conscious of the ETS2 derogation. We all take our views and our advices in relation to this. We have a derogation from opting into the ETS. We do not want to have a situation where we transfer revenues being collected by one form of taxation and spent domestically here over to a large payment of billions of euro to the European Union. We have to consider all of those issues. The tax strategy group paper, which no doubt Sinn Féin will be considering as part of its alternative budget too, talks about trajectories and different products. The Deputy is correct; there are things the Government can choose to do. The Government cannot do everything. The Government can help people with costs in general, including the cost of energy and filling the home heating tank through a variety of means, including the income tax system.
124. Deputy Martin Daly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the steps he is taking to ensure adequate access to cash and in-person banking services in rural communities, particularly towns in counties Roscommon and Galway; the way in which the effectiveness of the access-to-cash framework is being assessed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [68571/26]
I ask the Minister the steps being taken to ensure adequate access to cash and in-person banking services in rural communities, particularly in towns in the counties of Roscommon and Galway, and how the effectiveness of the access-to-cash framework is being assessed under the Finance Act (Provision of Access to Cash Infrastructure) 2025.
I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. The Government is committed to ensuring that cash remains available as a means of payment and last year put legislation in place to achieve the same. The Finance (Provision of Access to Cash Infrastructure Act) 2025, which was commenced on 13 June 2025, implements a recommendation from the 2022 retail banking review as part of the legislative framework. The section 5 order issued under the Act established criteria to ensure that access to cash infrastructure across the State remains sufficient and effective. Designated entities which are credit institutions that hold prescribed percentages of current accounts and household deposits are responsible for ensuring those criteria are met. The Central Bank is responsible for monitoring and enforcing the access-to-cash framework on a quarterly basis. This includes assessing the number of cash service points and the ATMs against the criteria prescribed in the section 5 order.
The initial quarterly reports published by the Central Bank indicate that the levels of cash infrastructure remain broadly in line with those criteria. Where non-compliance is identified, the designated entities are responsible for taking the necessary steps to address it. In addition to the access-to-cash criteria, the Central Bank has implemented a local deficiency framework, effective since 1 July this year. The framework allows members of the public to notify the Central Bank where they believe there is inefficient access to cash services in their locality, even where the access-to-cash criteria for the wider region have been met. Perhaps that is something the Deputy is referring to in his own constituency. The Central Bank has published guidelines detailing how it will assess submissions, make determinations on whether a local deficiency in cash infrastructure exists, and decide if remediation is required. The guidelines are available on the Central Bank's website, along with a cash access map, to help individuals to identify the location of cash services in their area.
I thank the Minister of State for his answer and I am reassured by what he tells me. Cash is still a vital component of our economy, especially in rural areas. In my own town of Ballygar, County Galway, we lost the Bank of Ireland in 2021 and access to 24-hour cash. It took a considerable campaign by the Ballygar Regeneration Group to get the Athenry Credit Union to install an ATM in June of this year. Cash still remains a critical safety net for individual groups, especially elderly people, people who are living with disability or people who may have an intellectual disability. It is a tool for social inclusion. It allows for immediate settlement of bills and it is a fundamental safeguard for consumer privacy. It is also a real backup in cases where the digital infrastructure around money transfers may fail or in the case of a natural disaster.
I could not agree more with the Deputy. It is critically important that we retain the use of cash and that it is available and acceptable by all businesses. It is a legitimate way of paying for goods and services. I will address what has been done to correct deficiencies in the Deputy's constituency, which he is focusing on this evening. The most recent quarterly access to cash report published by the Central Bank, based on data collected as of 30 June, identified a non-compliance with the criteria in the west region, of which counties Galway and Roscommon are part. Specifically, deficits were identified in the number of ATMs per 100,000 people and the percentage of the population that should be within 10 km of a cash service point.
Detailed information on the number and location of ATM cash service points is available on the Central Bank website. The Central Bank has issued a non-compliance notification to the designated entities and after receipt of the notification, the designated entities have at least one month and up to eight weeks to present proposals to the bank for addressing each instance of non-compliance. Regarding what the Deputy is raising in the Chamber today, the Central Bank is acutely aware of where there are deficiencies and is already acting on that.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I take the reassurance that there is a constant monitoring of cash access and that the system is responsive to individual communities and groups that have a problem in accessing cash.
I come back to the idea that rural communities depend on cash. Due to the lack of transport links and accessibility to ATMs or other banking services, it helps people who are unbanked and those who rely on setting their day-to-day grocery bills and transactions in cash. It is an accessible, physical means of exchange for vulnerable citizens. It also helps increased budget management for many people because cash is a tangible thing for them. In a world of increasing loss of privacy for individual citizens where major corporations control our identities and data, it is most important that we have the safety net of cash in our society.
"Local deficiencies" is the term used in the legislation for where particular difficulties arise in accessing cash in NUTS 3 regions. Even if a region meets the designations but people locally feel that particular pockets within the overall region are adversely affected, there is the mechanism whereby a local person or representative can notify the Central Bank directly. The Central Bank will then assess each submission and determine whether that particular local geographical area warrants a remedy. There a very clear mechanism whereby local areas can ensure that access to cash is readily available. As a fourth-generation postmaster in a small village in Westmeath, what I would say is that, if people do not use services such as that, they will lose them. It is critical that people use the services that are there because we only miss the water when the well runs dry. Services such as the post office and credit union, particularly in rural Ireland, are critical for ensuring that people who are not banking literate have the ability to carry on their daily lives, pay their bills, access the cash, etc. I will put the call out there to use the services that are in people's localities because if they do not, they will lose them.
125. Deputy Thomas Gould asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance for an update on the collection of the vacant homes tax. [68491/26]
Deputy Gould ask me to take this in his absence. Obviously, we have been waiting a long time for the vacant homes tax to be introduced. There was a collection of data and so on. It has been introduced now. We understand that the collection rates are very low. I am asking the Minister for an update. We have the 2025 self-assessed data, but what is the most recent data the Minister has? Have we seen a spike in terms of compliance? What options is the Department looking at for this year? I think we can accept that the tax is not working in its current form.
I thank Deputy Doherty and Deputy Gould, whom I know has a particular interest in this. The vacant homes tax was introduced in 2022. The tax is currently charged at seven times the base rate of local property tax. Following re-evaluation last year, in which all local property tax charges were increased by a small to moderate amount, vacant homes tax will scale accordingly. The tax operates on a self-assessment basis where the number of properties in scope and the amount of tax payable depends on the self-assessed returns submitted by property owners, the number of properties declared as liable and the number of property owners entitled to claim available exemptions from the tax. There was a decrease in the number of properties liable for the vacant homes tax between the first and second chargeable periods and a further decrease between the second and third chargeable periods. This is not unexpected, given the behavioural nature of the tax, its objective of bringing vacant residential properties into use and the level of demand, which we all know, for housing in the State.
Regarding the collection of vacant homes tax, I am advised by Revenue that, from January to August of this year, approximately €1.34 million was collected in vacant homes tax. As the Deputy is aware, I intend to introduce a new derelict property tax in this year's budget. Further details about the tax will be part of budget 2027, which I hope we can then legislate for in the Finance Bill. Creating and introducing the new tax this year is a key priority for my Department. It is hoped that this tax will paint a clear picture of the level of dereliction across our towns and cities. The data collected will help inform local and national decisions regarding long-term vacant and derelict properties. I will continue to work with colleagues to ensure that any further interventions are appropriately calibrated and represent the best use of resources.
The new measure will try to build on the progress we have made to date in relation to vacancy and dereliction. The derelict properties tax - a robust one using Revenue - is the way to go. We will be outlining details of that in the budget but looking to legislate across the House on this between now and the end of year.
My understanding, and the Minister might correct me if I am wrong, is that dereliction and vacancy are two different things.
They are, yes.
We are talking about apples and oranges here. The Minister is talking about a derelict properties tax. That is fine; a property that is derelict is visibly derelict. We are talking about vacant homes. We are talking about how the whole idea of this tax is to get homes into usage and to penalise people for leaving properties vacant and not using them in the middle of a housing crisis. We have argued time and again for many years with the Government to introduce this tax and to make it stronger and its rates higher.
Crucially, we cannot have the situation where the Central Statistics Office, CSO, says there are 70,000 vacant properties. I accept that not all of the 70,000 would fall under the scope of this tax because of some of the caveats and exemptions that are there, but it is not the case that there are only 2,361 vacant properties across the State. It is just not the case. This has been going on, and what I have not heard from the Minister is how he is going to fix it. He is telling me that he is going to introduce a different tax for a different type of property. That is not what I am interested in at the minute. I am interested in the tax that has existed for the last four years. It is simply not working. Has the Minister any proposals to actually fix this? Are we going to see anything in the budget that is going to fix this or is the Minister just going to leave it the way it is?
I fully understand and agree that vacancy and dereliction are two different things, but the taxes are all aimed at the same purpose of making sure that we get homes back into use. A tax of vacant residential property is one policy tool to address vacancy but it is also a behavioural change tax. It is about making sure that people do not leave houses in vacancy. We would expect, when we bring in a tax, that behavioural change will start to take effect.
I take the Deputy's point. He referenced the 70,000 figure while also acknowledging that there may be many that do not meet the definition of vacancy. When Revenue looked through all of this, as the Deputy will remember when all of this was introduced, it wrote to around 25,000 property owners who were potentially within the scope of the vacant homes tax. Many of the property owners declared them as being occupied and for the first chargeable period of the tax, there were about 6,800 properties declared as vacant. Some 2,800 of them claimed an exemption from the tax. In the first chargeable period, which went from November 2022 to October 2023, there were 3,910 properties liable for the vacant homes tax. That reduced in the next chargeable period to 2,357. In the third chargeable period, from November 2024 to October 2025, there were 1,655 properties liable. Therefore, we see this as a tax that is actually bringing about behavioural change. The next focus from a Revenue perspective and a Government perspective will be tackling what we believe to be the bigger issue around derelict properties.
The Minister has announced the derelict properties tax numerous times, but derelict properties are derelict properties and are harder to get into use in the system than vacant homes. Of course we need the tax on them - that should absolutely happen - but it is not a case of looking at something else and forgetting about the fact that this tax here, which has been introduced for the last four years, is not working. I still have not heard anything from the Minister that suggests there is going to be any change. He has brought in a tax that allows people to self-declare that a house is not vacant. Is there any follow up in relation to this?
Is there a compliance issue? Has the Tánaiste sat down with Revenue? Is he concerned that fewer than 10% of those who got these letters are paying the tax? Is he concerned that a tiny fraction of the owners of properties that the CSO identifies as vacant are in compliance when it comes to the tax?
We are in the middle of a housing crisis. The accepted view is that a large number of homes are vacant. The idea behind this behavioural tax is that you would tax people in order to get these properties into use. Have 10,000 or 20,000 houses gone into the private rental sector as single tenancies? No, they have not. It has gone in the other direction. All the evidence points towards there not being a massive change in behaviour. On foot of that, one can only be led to believe that this tax is not working and is not being complied with.
Revenue does a very good job of collecting taxation in this country. That is why there are often calls in this House for derelict properties to be handed over to Revenue, because Revenue has teeth. As the Deputy knows, Revenue has powers under the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 to address compliance or non-compliance with legislation. It has the power to require a chargeable person to file a vacant homes tax return. It has powers to make inquiries, raise and amend assessments and request a chargeable person to provide certain records. If anyone has evidence of people not complying with taxation law, I am sure Revenue would be very interested in that, particularly as it also has the power to issue a notice to a chargeable person requiring them to provide records to demonstrate that their property was in use as a dwelling for 30 days or more in a chargeable period. Where such records are not provided or where the records provided are insufficient, Revenue may deem the property to be vacant for the purposes of the vacant homes tax.
It is entirely possible that when this House legislates on vacancy and links it with the local property tax structure, behaviour does change and that, therefore, the number of properties that become eligible for tax, when it is a behavioural change tax, actually falls. We keep these issues under review, but Revenue does have significant enforcement powers.
126. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance whether changes to the tax system are being considered for budget 2027 to better recognise the additional costs faced by persons with disabilities, including the cost of transport, energy and medical and assistive equipment; and whether additional or enhanced tax reliefs in this area are under consideration. [68536/26]
Are changes to the tax system being considered? I understand that the Tánaiste will not be announcing anything this evening, but I ask that anything relating to people with disabilities, particularly in the context of the cost of transport, energy, medical and assistive equipment, be pushed. Are additional or enhanced tax reliefs in this area under consideration? Is the Department working on anything relating respite or overnight stays for people with disabilities?
Across Government - and I know this is an issue the Deputy is passionate about - we recognise the significant financial pressures experienced by households, particularly the financial pressures being experienced by households in which there is a person with a disability, amid the heightened cost-of-living environment that obtains. In response, we have implemented a number of measures to try to help the most vulnerable.
When this Government took office, we committed to a step change in the delivery of supports and services for people with disabilities in line with our programme for Government commitments. The previous budget was the first step in delivering on this. We provided €3.83 billion to specialist disability services this year. That is an increase of almost 20%, or €618 million. It was worth every penny and was vital, but it was a much larger increase than went to pretty much any other Department. It is going to be vital in the context of delivering on the national human rights strategy for disabled persons.
There are already a number of measures within the tax system that support people with disabilities and carers. These include tax relief for health expenses, which provides relief to individuals who have incurred costs in respect of qualifying health expenses, such as, for example, their medical equipment. In addition, substantial measures relating to income tax and the universal social charge have obviously reduced the tax burden for all workers in recent years. Broadly speaking, the income tax measures implemented over the period of the previous Government were in line with wage growth. In order to support people with energy costs, we took a number of measures.
To answer Deputy Heneghan's direct question, the tax system is not the only vehicle in this regard. That is why we are committed to introducing a cost-of-disability payment. Work is being done by the Minister, Deputy Calleary, on that. I met the Minister of State, Deputy Higgins, earlier today, and there is good work being done in relation to respite services, which is a key issue. The Government will look at this matter in the round across a range of Departments in the context of what we can do to help people with both service provision and costs. The Government is very committed to introducing a cost-of-disability payment in this year's budget.
I will always push for plug-in solar. The Tánaiste sent a lovely letter to my office regarding finance and directly helping on that. We need to make it easily available for people across Ireland and do a pilot scheme for those with disabilities or those who live in rented accommodation. I appreciate the support I got from the Tánaiste's office in that letter.
I recently attended the Before We Die national assembly at the Helix, which is located in my old university. That campaign asks one fundamental question, namely who will care for adult children - people's sons and daughters - with intellectual disabilities when ageing parents are no longer able to do so? At the Helix, figures which show that 2,314 adults with intellectual disabilities are living with parents over the age of 70 were presented. More than 500 are living with parents over the age of 80. These families are providing lifelong care. Some of the supports the Tánaiste mentioned are a help to them. In the context of budget 2027, will he examine whether the tax system can give greater recognition to families caring for those with disabilities, particularly older parents who continue to provide full-time care, in circumstances where appropriate supports or residential provision are not available?
I thank the Deputy for his ongoing interest in and genuine expertise regarding the issue of renewables and plug-in solar, and for his correspondence. I continue to engage with colleagues across Government on that. We will keep in touch with the Deputy in respect of it.
I also thank the Deputy for raising the Before We Die campaign. This is something we are discussing right across Government. The Taoiseach and I, along with relevant Ministers, intend to meet this group again shortly. The Taoiseach and I have already met its representatives. I would argue that many if not all Ministers have met the group, as have so many other TDs. The group is right. There are real issues here. There are some legislative issues that it has highlighted, but there are also a number of practical issues. If we are building more homes - not enough, but more - in our communities. If we are building more social homes than at any time since the seventies, even a small change in a community in terms of a percentage of those homes being provided for those with disabilities could really move the dial. There is a lot of good work going on with the Ministers for housing and disability on this matter.
On tax and expenditure, we will have to wait until next week's budget. We will engage during the week on specific measures, but people can expect that a cost-of-disability payment to be introduced in the budget.
I appreciate that. I look forward to next week. In respect of the budget, what the Independents and I have been pushing for is relief for those with disabilities. They need to be protected and looked after, particularly in the context of what the Before We Die campaign has highlighted. They also need to be catered for in relation to the greater context of energy and how plug-in solar, battery storage and other smarter uses of electricity can really help them. Last week, we saw people asking for a one-off energy measure of €500. How about one-off, ten-year solar panels that are going to constantly reduce people's bills? That is something I will continue to push for, and I welcome the engagement.
I will send further correspondence to the Department regarding a constituent who has raised the position of people with obstructive sleep apnea who require continuous positive airway pressure therapy. This relates to the question I started with. I understand that it is cheeky to throw it in, but when someone is diagnosed with a chronic condition, they must continually use medical equipment. I would appreciate if tax treatment in this regard could be facilitated in an adequate way as well.
I am always in awe of the Deputy's ability to cover a lot in a question, but these are all serious issues. I do not mean to be flippant.
You have to be.
Earlier today, the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, brought 11 measures to Cabinet in relation to improving grants around solar, battery storage and the boiler scrappage scheme. The Deputy is right. I understand, as does he, that we have to help people in the here and now. Many people are looking for help in order to allow their families and businesses to make the transition. Sometimes, the gap in that regard can be too big to bridge. The Minister, Deputy O'Brien, is coming up with a lot of ideas that I think are going to make a real and meaningful difference to people. I hope the measures brought forward today help. I know the Deputy will keep on the Minister's case and our case in regard to improvements in other areas.
On obstructive sleep apnea, I will consider the Deputy's correspondence with the Minister for Health on that issue and see what may be possible. I am happy to have a further discussion with the Deputy on the matter.
128. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will remove excise duty from home heating oil in recognition of the severe pressures faced by families as a result of soaring costs. [68612/26]
I have been raising the issue of home heating oil with the Tánaiste over a long period. The reality is that people have used home heating oil right throughout the current crisis. They use it to heat their homes. They also use it to heat their water in order to be able to wash the dishes. Home heating oil is what 700,000 households across the State rely on, and the Tánaiste refused to cut any excise at all from it because all of the excise is carbon tax. I put it to the Tánaiste again that he needs to reduce the excise on home heating oil. He needs to take it away completely.
It can be done under the European rules. There is no minimum requirement and therefore the Government made an error by not supporting families in the past when it reduced it on petrol, diesel and green diesel.
Thanks, Deputy. You can come back in afterwards.
I am asking the Minister to take all the excise away from home heating oil while these prices remain high.
I thank the Deputy very much. The Government is very conscious of the price increases in home heating oil. They are very real and significant. The conflict in the Middle East has severely impacted the cost of kerosene. We have taken some measures that have helped those most at risk of fuel poverty and the Deputy knows that. We extended the fuel allowance by a further four weeks. That resulted in additional payments to about 470,000 fuel allowance recipients, many of whom would use home heating oil. It meant a typical household receiving the fuel allowance, which is roughly a quarter of all households in the country, received €1,216 over the course of the fuel allowance season. We also deferred the planned increase in carbon tax on home heating fuels which was due to occur last May until after budget day and said we would have an opportunity to review these matters again in the budget. As the Deputy knows, we took a range of other measures as well, including expanding fuel allowance eligibility.
The Deputy is correct - we have debated this for quite some time - that the fuel excise applied to kerosene home heating oil is purely carbon tax. We need to be honest about what is and is not possible to alleviate the burden of higher fuel prices in the short and long term. Changes have to be carefully calibrated. We are working through this as a Government and the details will be published on budget day. However, as the tax strategy group paper identifies, we cannot treat carbon differently on different products. Regarding kerosene, there may well be something we can do in that space. I do not necessarily want to be argumentative about this but there is advice available to me - I am happy to discuss it and no doubt we will during the budget - on not risking our derogation in relation to the ETS. We certainly do not want to end up, and I know the Deputy does not either, paying billions more to Europe as a consequence of doing that, so there is a balance we have got to get right on that. I am happy to share our views on that. There obviously will be some people disproportionately at risk of fuel poverty and we have got to continue to target those measures at them. We need to look at all this in the round and we need to continue, to Deputy Heneghan's point, to look at helping people move from fossil fuel-dependence, though I accept that is not as easy for everybody. This will all be looked at in the round and I have been clear I am minded to do something about the taxation that applies to kerosene.
We had the discussion earlier on and the Minister will say it was a Fine Gael Government that did this but there is no doubt, if you look back at the record, that the reason the Government did not reduce any excise duty on home heating oil is because it is carbon tax, which is this Holy Grail. I really do not want to go into a discussion on that, but the Government is moving now. For the first time it is going to reduce the carbon tax. That is good. It is good that the Government has got there, or that it is going to get there next Tuesday.
As for what the Minister says about what is and is not possible in Europe, if he is willing to share that he can send it to me. My understanding is that the new rule will not take effect until 2028 and therefore a temporary reduction on kerosene will not have an impact in relation to this. If we do this for a period during 2027 it will not have an impact. Obviously if we were to continue it into 2028 it would but for the immediate future it is a bit of a red herring, unless the Minister knows differently. The issue is that it is within his gift to take all the carbon tax off home heating oil. That is about 16 cent per litre. We charge VAT on top of the carbon tax so it would reduce the cost of a fill by €183. Would that undo the price increases that have happened? Not a chance. Prices have gone through the roof. They have gone up about €700 since the start of the year. However, it would show that the Government is doing the maximum it can on excise duty on this type of fuel, and that is what I am asking the Minister to do.
We should have an informed conversation about this. What the Deputy has said is true. There are things the Government can do and this House can do, and there are things we cannot do. I am going to be honest, as the Deputy has been honest, in saying whatever we do on the taxation side will not be enough - I am talking about the taxation on energy piece - to bring prices back to where they were last year. The Deputy is not seeking that and nor am I. There are things we can do to not make the situation worse and there may be things we can do to make the situation a little better. We need to get that calibration right and that is what we are working to do. There is the question of whether you do something temporary or whether you try to provide clarity for the next number of years. At the moment, as the Deputy knows well, there are two things, namely the trajectory out to 2030 and how the carbon tax is applied to products. Do we try to provide just help in the here and now or do we try to provide a clear view on the trajectory of carbon tax on kerosene out to 2030? If we do, that very much impacts on ETS 2. I accept the Deputy is correct about it not coming in until 2028 and I am happy to very honestly debate this issue but we are looking at all of this in the round. Kerosene and gas are two issues we should seriously look at.
This again bring us back to the point we are at now, which for a lot of people feels like an emergency. There are things happening in this State that are genuinely concerning from a health and safety point of view. There are mothers and fathers going to the petrol station and filling five-gallon drums with kerosene. I am not sure how good an idea it is to be driving around country roads with five-gallon drums of kerosene in the boot, but people cannot afford anything else. There are plumbers being called out to deal with airlocks over and over again. They are refusing to charge the call-out fee because they know the only reason the system is airlocked is there is no oil in the tank. At a time when there is money in our coffers to support families I am asking the Minister again because this is something he has the ability to change. There is no minimum level of carbon tax on kerosene at this point in time.
Thanks, Deputy Doherty.
The Minister can reduce it all. He can take the cost down by €183 a fill. We published the legislation.
Deputy, we have one more question.
The Government voted against that and the following day it came out and said it might do something on carbon tax. I welcome that. My job is to push the Minister into positions he does not want to be in. That is fine. He will refuse to say he did not want to be there but I can play back the tunes in here.
The Tánaiste to respond.
I can show the Minister his predecessor saying the Government was not going to introduce-----
Thanks, Deputy.
-----a renter's tax credit, that it was not going to introduce mortgage interest relief-----
Thanks, Deputy.
-----and that it was not going to introduce the IREF stuff. I could play all those things back but my job-----
You are just taking time from the next question, Deputy.
-----is to keep on pushing and pushing.
With respect, will you please sit down?
The question I am asking is whether the Minister is minded-----
Can you give the Tánaiste an opportunity to respond, please?
-----to go the full level in relation to excise duty on kerosene.
The Deputy has described his job as he views it. It is of course his job to hold me to account in this House. It is also our job, every now and again, to try to work collaboratively on different issues. We will not agree on all of it and that is fine and healthy but we agree that we are living through a cost-of-living crisis, that the cost of kerosene and energy is very high, that we need to look at measures to try to assist people and that even when we do that there are global factors.
Not everybody is equally affected. We all know that and that is why targeted measures through the fuel allowance are also important to reach those most at risk of fuel poverty. Not everyone is at risk of that. The cost of living is real for lots of people but some people are acutely at risk of fuel poverty. Trying to reach them in the here and now is important too. We showed an ability to do that somewhat last year with the fuel allowance changes. That helped people. Enabling people to get that lump sum option helps to fill the home heating tank as well. There are now about 470,000 households getting the fuel allowance as well, so it is not insignificant. I take the Deputy's point. We published the tax strategy group paper this summer to have an informed discussion on the carbon tax trajectory and how it applies to certain products. We will bring forward our specific proposals next week.
Thanks, Tánaiste. The final question tonight is again in the name of Deputy Carthy, to be taken by Deputy Doherty.
I am sorry, it is Deputy Boland.
130. Deputy Grace Boland asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the way in which he intends to balance measures to support working families with the need for continued investment in infrastructure and public services in budget 2027. [68584/26]
I did not think I was going to get in there at all with Deputy Doherty overrunning.
Ireland's strong finances are the result of years of careful economic management and responsible decision-making by successive Fine Gael Governments. Due to that stewardship we are in a position to invest in the future while also supporting households with the pressures they face today. However, as the Tánaiste knows, many working families are feeling under pressure due to the rising cost of groceries, childcare and energy. He might give me some comfort that the budget will see measures that will support and help working families to not just get by but to get ahead.
I thank the Deputy. I will indeed. The first job of government is to not make anything worse so when there is a global energy crisis and real cost-of-living pressures we need to make sure we try to pull policy levers that are going to help and not chase inflation. The measures we have taken on energy already have had a positive impact on the economy. I am not saying petrol and diesel prices are not extraordinarily high, because they are. They are a lot lower than in other European countries, while still being very high. However, they are having a broader positive effect in somewhat suppressing inflation growth. Sometimes people in this House ask why we did this for the motorists.
We did it for the motorists but it has helped suppress food inflation and economists in my Department reckon it has helped suppress inflation growth by around 0.6%.
There are lots of different ways to help working families. Obviously, the social protection system is one. We have a good social protection system in this country helping those most in need. I am proud of the changes we made around the working family payment. We need to continue to support those most in need but the tax system can help too. It is my view that too many workers are paying the higher rate of tax but it is also an objective fact that people are paying the higher rate of tax at below the average income in Ireland. The programme for Government clearly says that, all other things being equal, we should be looking at bands and credits. We made a lot of progress in government over the previous time and we need to try and build on that so there will be an income tax package that will help people keep more of their own money but will also help make sure people do not pay more tax as their wages grow or careers progress or they get promotions or work overtime.
I know the Deputy feels very passionate about childcare because we have also discussed it. We have to continue to really invest in childcare. I know the Minister for children will bring forward measures there. There is a clear commitment in the programme for Government around where we want to get to over the lifetime of the Government. We have to look and take a step in that direction in this budget and we will do that as well. The Deputy is also right to say that we have to look at how we continue to invest in infrastructure because in her constituency, which is the youngest and fastest-growing in the country, we need social and economic infrastructure. A significant amount of money has been allocated to capital and we have to make sure that is delivered quickly and cut through bottlenecks and red tape - the work the Minister for public expenditure is leading on in terms of accelerating infrastructure.
I very much welcome the income tax package. It is really important that work pays and as the Tánaiste know, our working families are really the backbone of the economy. Childcare is not only essential for equality, it is also essential for our economy. Childcare is actually essential infrastructure and I very much welcome the investment in childcare not only in affordability but also accessibility. Fingal is one of the youngest areas in the country and Balbriggan is the youngest large town. It is essential that we are investing in childcare and investing in community childcare, which is something that my area really lacks. I very much hope that we see support for a huge expansion of community childcare in this budget. Without giving away the budget, the Tánaiste might also briefly indicate some of the measures we might see next week so that I can go back and tell my constituents.
What we will see next week in the first instance is an ability to make sure we keep our country safe. When I came into this House, unemployment was around 15% and the IMF was in town and not just as visitors. We have all worked really hard to get our country back to a place of full employment where we are having discussions on how best to reduce tax and to increase public expenditure. We should never take that for granted so keeping the country safe at a time of huge global volatility is our first job as a Government. We will do that. We will continue to run budget surpluses and invest in our funds not for rainy days but for demographic change, infrastructure delivery, climate and adaptation.
We will take measures in the here and now to help people with the energy crisis. We have to make calls around excise and the debate we have been having in terms of home heating oil and gas. There will obviously be a personal income tax package. The Government is clear about that. The Deputy is right. Childcare is a social issue and an equality issue but it is also an economic issue. I am meeting lots of people across the country - disproportionately women - who are making career decisions not on the basis of their choice but on the basis of the lack of affordability or accessibility of a childcare place. Next week in the budget, we are determined as a Government to take a big step in that direction and to build on that for the lifetime of this Government.
I very much welcome the Tánaiste's comments about childcare. It is not just affecting parents. We have nearly full employment but instead of being able to participate on a part-time or even full-time basis in our economy, many grandparents are actually providing childcare because there is absolutely no choice in areas like mine in Skerries and Balbriggan, where there really is no accessible childcare. I know that the Tánaiste is working closely with the Minister for children but it is really important that we see the second stage of the action plan launched this year so that we have a road map and know where we are going over the next three years to make sure that we see more accessible and more affordable childcare. We know that community childcare actually drives affordability and, unfortunately, because of the lack of it in my area, my area has among the highest childcare fees in the country so it is really important that we invest in our economy by investing in our people and supporting parents and grandparents to participate more fully in our economy if they so choose.
I fully agree with the Deputy. I know she sees it in Balbriggan and Skerries and across her constituency in Fingal. It is the Minister for children's intention to produce that road map. A lot of work is going into it because as the Deputy rightly says, there are lots of moving parts here. We have to address affordability, accessibility and how we support the workforce. We have made some good progress on that. We have also made decisions over the course of the past year to invest public money for the first time in capital projects in terms of the development of childcare facilities as well. This is a key issue. We also have to recognise that it is up to a parent as well so it is about providing parental choice and recognising that some parents will perhaps want a childminder in their home and the likes. There is stuff we can consider doing on the tax side in relation to supporting childminders too so we are looking at this in the round as a Government. We see it as a key core priority and a key part of Ireland's economic and social infrastructure. We also recognise that for many families, it is a second mortgage. It is a really big bill. We have made good progress on it over a number of years as a Government. I am proud of what we have done with ECCE as well but building on this will be one of the planks of the budget and not just the budget. It will be one of the planks of our work over the next four years.
