Written Answers Nos. 277-296
277. Deputy Albert Dolan asked the Minister for Finance to provide data on the distribution of mortgage loan sizes issued in each of the past five years, broken down by loan size band (for example, under €100,000, €100,000–€200,000, and so on), in tabular form. [32145/25]
View answer278. Deputy Albert Dolan asked the Minister for Finance if the Central Bank of Ireland tracks the number and value of self-build mortgage loans issued by regulated lenders; and if so, to provide this data for each of the past five years. [32147/25]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 277 and 278 together.
The Central Bank has advised that it does not publish data on mortgages by loan size issued over the past five years or on self-build mortgage loans. The Central Bank does however publish other data on residential mortgage lending in the Credit and Banking Statistics, including Retail Interest Rates and Mortgage Arrears tables, as well as in the Bank Balance Sheets data. These publications are all available on the Central Bank website.
279. Deputy Rory Hearne asked the Minister for Finance further to interactions at the Joint Committee on Arts, Media, Communications, Culture and Sport on 28 May 2025 (details supplied), if he will clarify his Department’s interpretation of the Revenue Commissioners v. Karshan (Midlands) Ltd t/a Domino’s Pizza [2023] judgment in the Supreme Court in respect of self-employment versus employment for tax purposes; his Department’s plans, if any, to act on the Supreme Court’s decision; to clarify existing legislation in this regard; if the guidance of the Revenue Commissioners or the Workplace Relations Commission is most accurate in relation to corporate entities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32198/25]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that under Section 851A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 it is precluded from disclosing taxpayer information and therefore neither I, nor Revenue, can comment on the specifics of the topic discussed during the referenced interaction in the Joint Committee on Arts, Media, Communications, Culture and Sport on 28 May 2025.
In relation to the Deputy’s query about the Supreme Court case, in a unanimous decision on 20 October 2023, the Supreme Court delivered a detailed judgment in The Revenue Commissioners v. Karshan (Midlands) Ltd. t/a Domino’s Pizza. The case was concerned with whether the delivery drivers were independent contractors under a “contract for service” and taxable under Schedule D of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, or employees under a “contract of service”, and taxable under Schedule E of that Act (PAYE). It is important to note that the case was concerned solely with the proper tax treatment of the workers concerned and so did not concern the PRSI class of said workers.
The judgment provides an extensive review of relevant caselaw, and succinctly summarises it through the provision of a five-step decision-making framework. The decision-making framework consists of five questions that is to be used to resolve the question of whether a contract is one of service (employee) or for service (self-employed) for tax purposes.
Following on from the Karshan ruling, as was previously the case, it is for a business who engages a person to make the determination whether the individual is employed or self-employed for tax purposes based on the facts and circumstances of each relationship and payment. It is not a matter of choice, either for the business, the individual or Revenue.
To assist businesses in making their determination, Revenue published extensive detailed guidance which outlines its position in relation to the application of the five-step framework. This is outlined in its Tax and Duty Manual 05-01-30 "Revenue Guidelines for Determining Employment Status for Taxation purposes", which was published in May 2024 and is available at www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/income-tax-capital-gains-tax-corporation-tax/part-05/05-01-30.pdf
It is important to note that while Revenue has responsibility for determination of employment status of a worker for taxation purposes, any responsibility for determination of employment status of a worker for PRSI purposes falls to the Department of Social Protection (DSP). Likewise, responsibility for employment rights, such as employment equality, minimum wage rates, holiday pay and sick pay, etc., falls to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), which is under the aegis of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.
In November 2024, Revenue, DSP and the WRC published a revised Joint Code of Practice on Determining Employment Status was published on behalf of the above three bodies and is available at https://assets.gov.ie/static/documents/code-of-practice-on-determining-employment-status-cb301d37-93cb-4fbf-b45c-6997ed370f04.pdf. However, it should be noted that each of those three state bodies operates within its own legislative framework in respect to the determination of employment status and a decision by one body is non-binding on the other two bodies. While Revenue endeavours to ensure consistency, occasionally, due to the separate legislative frameworks, differences arise. As a result, it cannot be assumed that the decision of one of the three state bodies will be replicated by either or both of the other two bodies.
280. Deputy Pa Daly asked the Minister for Finance the estimated revenue that would be foregone by eliminating the VRT on imported new electric vehicles, in tabular form. [32231/25]
View answer281. Deputy Pa Daly asked the Minister for Finance the estimated revenue that would be foregone by eliminating the VRT on imported 2nd hand electric vehicles, in tabular form. [32232/25]
View answer282. Deputy Pa Daly asked the Minister for Finance the estimated revenue that would be foregone by eliminating the VRT on imported all electric vehicles, in tabular form. [32233/25]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 280, 281 and 282 together.
I am advised by Revenue that the current VRT rates for Category A and B electric vehicles (EVs) are 7% and 13.3% respectively. Category M motorcycles are exempt from VRT. EVs with an Open Market Selling Price (OMSP) of up to €40,000 are granted VRT relief of up to €5,000 while EVs with an OMSP of greater than €40,000 but less than €50,000 receive a reduced level of VRT relief. EVs above €50,000 are not eligible for VRT relief.
Using 2024 data the table below provides the value of EV relief and the net VRT EV liabilities.
|
EVs |
EV Relief €m |
EV Liabilities €m |
|
New |
23.2 |
39.5 |
|
Used |
2.4 |
2.0 |
|
New & Used |
25.6 |
41.5 |
283. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Finance to provide a timeframe for the resolution of appeals by the Disabled Drivers Board of Appeal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32251/25]
View answer284. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Finance to provide a timeframe for the resolution of appeals by the Disabled Drivers Board of Appeal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32252/25]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 283 and 284 together.
The Deputy should note at the outset that the Disabled Drivers Board of Appeal (DDMBA) is independent and wholly determines the approach and methods for the appeals process as set out in legislative requirements. This independent approach also applies to the timeframe of its work. I understand that a validation system has been put in place to ensure the figures for those requiring an appeal hearing remain accurate. The validation process has removed 444 individuals from the waiting list as they no longer required an appeal hearing. As of the end of May 2025, there are 423 appellants on the waiting list, from an opening total in December 2023 of 1,091 appellants.
At an appeal hearing the Board reviews the decision by a HSE Primary Medical Officer and determines if an appellant does, or does not meet, one of the six medical criteria. Only if an appellant meets one of the six eligibility criteria will the Board issue a Board Medical Certificate.
I have no role in relation to the granting or refusal of PMC's and the HSE and the Medical Board of Appeal must be independent in their clinical determinations.
285. Deputy Holly Cairns asked the Minister for Finance if his Department has examined the matter of mortgages and loans being refused to disabled people and those with chronic illnesses due to being classed as 'high risk' by financial institutions; and if he has examined measures which would provide these groups greater access to loans and mortgages. [32322/25]
View answerThere is a legal and regulatory macro prudential and consumer protection framework in place which governs the provision of residential mortgages to consumers by banks and other Central Bank regulated mortgage providers.
For example, in order to protect overall financial stability, the Central Bank has put in place macro-prudential measures for residential mortgage lending which apply, with a certain level of flexibility to lenders, loan-to-value (LTV) and loan-to-income (LTI) requirements in relation to residential mortgage lending to consumers.
In addition to the above mortgage lending rules, there are also certain consumer protection requirements governing the provision of mortgage credit to consumers. For example, the European Union (Consumer Mortgage Credit Agreements) Regulations 2016 ('CMCAR') provide that a lender should only make credit available to a consumer where the result of the creditworthiness assessment indicates that the consumer’s obligations resulting from the credit agreement are likely to be met in the manner required under that agreement. The assessment of creditworthiness must be carried out on the basis of information on the consumer’s income and expenses and other financial and economic circumstances which is necessary, sufficient and proportionate.
In addition, the Central Bank’s Consumer Protection Code 2012 imposes ‘Knowing the Consumer and Suitability’ requirements on lenders. Under these requirements, lenders are required to assess affordability of credit and the suitability of a product or service based on the individual circumstances of each borrower. The Code specifies that the affordability assessment must include consideration of the information gathered on the borrower’s personal circumstances and financial situation. Furthermore, where a lender refuses a mortgage application, the CMCAR requires that the lender must inform the consumer without delay of the refusal. In addition, the Code requires that the lender must clearly outline to the consumer the reasons why the credit was not approved, and provide these reasons on paper if requested.
Within this regulatory framework, it is then a commercial matter for individual lenders to determine their own lending policies and to make their own lending decisions. As Minister for Finance, I have no function in such matters. However, if a consumer is not satisfied with the way a regulated firm is dealing with him/her in assessing a mortgage application, the consumer should make a complaint directly to the regulated firm. If the consumer is still not satisfied with the response from the regulated firm, he/she can refer the complaint to the statutory Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO). This independent office was put in place by the Oireachtas to adjudicate on disputes between consumers and financial service providers. The FSPO can be contacted on 01 567 7000 or at info@fspo.ie and their website is: www.fspo.ie/.
The Deputy may wish to note that, outside of the specific legal and regulatory framework governing the provision of mortgage credit to consumers, more generally the Equal Status Acts prohibits discrimination in the provision of goods and services on nine stated grounds, one of which is disability. Therefore, any entity which is involved in the business of providing goods or services, including the provision of mortgage credit or other mortgage related services, may not discriminate, unless there is a reasonable basis on credit risk or an other appropriate ground to do so, between borrowers based on disability.
Finally as the Deputy will know the Government, through the Local Authority Home Loan scheme, offers mortgage finance to eligible borrowers who are unable to obtain mortgage finance (or sufficient mortgage finance) from private sector/Central Bank regulated mortgage lenders. Further information on this mortgage finance scheme is available at https://localauthorityhomeloan.ie/.
286. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions (details supplied), if he can justify Revenue's unlawful destruction of the 13.3 million call recordings without a disposal authorisation given its own records retention schedule stipulates: "no class of Revenue records can be destroyed without first obtaining a disposal authorisation from the Director of the National Archives."; if he accepts Revenue's attempt at obtaining an retrospective disposal authorisation is an admission of guilt, if he accepts Revenue's destruction constituted a personal data breach under Article 4(12) GDPR, contrary to the National Archives Act 1986, as maintained by Article 6(2), absent a legal basis under Article 6(1); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32328/25]
View answer287. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions (details supplied), if he will confirm that the original message on Revenue's LPT Helpline on 22 March 2024, on 30 May 2024 and on 17 August 2024 stated the call "will be recorded" and "may be used for training and verification purposes" by callers without limit in case of dispute, will he confirm the original message had changed to his quote by 17 February 2025; if he will confirm "inbound and outbound" had been added by 15 May 2025 but omitted from his quote; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32329/25]
View answer288. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions (details supplied), if he will confirm that the original message on Revenue's LPT Helpline on 22 March 2024, on 30 May 2024 and on 17 August 2024 gave callers a legitimate expectation their recordings would be available to them for "verification purposes" without limit in case of dispute; if he will confirm the destruction constituted further processing incompatible with its original purpose, contrary to Article 5(1)(b) GDPR and Recital 39 GDPR; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32330/25]
View answer289. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions (details supplied), if Revenue notified the Data Protection Commission of the 13.3 million breaches within 72 hours of becoming aware of them, in accordance with Article 33(1) GDPR; the date on which Revenue did notify the DPC thereof; if Revenue is under investigation by the DPC in relation thereto; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32331/25]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 286, 287, 288 and 289 together.
I am advised by Revenue that the disposal of call recording records was undertaken without a corresponding disposal authorisation from the Director of the National Archives. Revenue’s current request to the National Archives for a disposal authorisation for call recordings is to address this administrative oversight and to put in place the correct authorisation for future disposals.
I am further advised by Revenue that, in 2024, the pre-recorded message for all calls to the Local Property Tax (LPT) helpline stated, “This call will be recorded for training and quality purposes”. The pre-recorded message did not refer to retention for “verification purposes”. This pre-recorded message was in place for the whole of the year 2024 and this was the sole basis and purpose for the recording of such calls. On 29 January 2025, the LPT helpline was moved to Revenue’s new contact centre telephony platform. At this time, the pre-recorded message changed to “For quality and customer satisfaction purposes, inbound and outbound calls may be recorded”, so as to align with other Revenue telephone services.
Revenue does not consider the destruction of the call recordings, in accordance with the “Schedule of Records” and “Records Retention and Disposal Policy” published on Revenue.ie, to be a personal data breach for the purposes of Article 4 (12) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Revenue has advised that the retention period of 6-12 months is considered sufficient time for any queries/disputes regarding the call recording to come to light and to address potential disputes about the detail of the call. Accordingly, the deletion of the call recordings in accordance with this policy does not constitute further processing incompatible with its original purpose.
Furthermore, Revenue’s lawful basis for the use of and access to taxpayer information which these call recordings contain are set out in Section 851B(2) of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. Where subsection (c) states that taxpayer information shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which it is processed. Revenue had regard to this provision in support of its decision to delete the recordings.
As Revenue does not consider the disposal of call recordings in accordance with the record retention schedule to be a personal data breach, therefore when call recordings are disposed of Revenue does not notify the Data Protection Commission.
290. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Finance the total annual funding provided by Home Building Finance Ireland to developers for home construction, by year and county/region, in tabular form. [32343/25]
View answer291. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Finance the current rate at which HBFI funding is being disbursed to developers; and how has this rate changed over recent years. [32344/25]
View answer292. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Finance the specific actions that will be taken to streamline the HBFI application process and eliminate redundant red tape that hinders funding access. [32345/25]
View answer293. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Finance the total number of applicants who have been refused HBFI funding or have failed to complete their applications due to the current bureaucratic requirements. [32346/25]
View answer294. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Finance the number of incomplete or rejected HBFI applications; and which administrative requirements are most frequently cited as obstacles. [32347/25]
View answer295. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Finance the measures being considered to simplify the funding application process and reduce the bureaucratic hurdles that are reportedly limiting developers' access to HBFI finance. [32348/25]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 290, 291, 292, 293, 294 and 295 together.
HBFI’s total loan approvals from inception to the end of December 2024 amounted to €2.67bn. The approved funding is across 184 projects, in 23 counties, and can support the delivery of 13,186 new homes.
See table below of annual funding approved by county by year since inception:
|
County |
2019 |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
|
|
€'m |
€'m |
€'m |
€'m |
€'m |
€'m |
|
Carlow |
€3 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
|
Cavan |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€3 |
€4 |
|
Clare |
€2 |
€0 |
€4 |
€0 |
€7 |
€13 |
|
Cork |
€14 |
€11 |
€21 |
€58 |
€33 |
€179 |
|
Donegal |
€0 |
€3 |
€6 |
€0 |
€0 |
€4 |
|
Dublin |
€9 |
€191 |
€193 |
€113 |
€165 |
€333 |
|
Galway |
€0 |
€6 |
€47 |
€0 |
€0 |
€123 |
|
Kerry |
€10 |
€0 |
€5 |
€18 |
€0 |
€88 |
|
Kildare |
€35 |
€15 |
€11 |
€14 |
€6 |
€50 |
|
Kilkenny |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€42 |
€0 |
€0 |
|
Laois |
€12 |
€0 |
€9 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
|
Limerick |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€16 |
€17 |
€10 |
|
Louth |
€3 |
€36 |
€23 |
€25 |
€19 |
€85 |
|
Mayo |
€0 |
€5 |
€10 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
|
Meath |
€10 |
€4 |
€82 |
€0 |
€59 |
€11 |
|
Monaghan |
€1 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€2 |
|
Offaly |
€0 |
€10 |
€9 |
€14 |
€5 |
€7 |
|
Sligo |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€17 |
|
Tipperary |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€6 |
€7 |
€23 |
|
Waterford |
€0 |
€0 |
€12 |
€0 |
€8 |
€0 |
|
Wexford |
€0 |
€3 |
€0 |
€10 |
€17 |
€1 |
|
Wicklow |
€8 |
€3 |
€8 |
€96 |
€55 |
€55 |
|
Westmeath |
€2 |
€0 |
€0 |
€0 |
€7 |
€6 |
|
Total |
€108 |
€287 |
€440 |
€413 |
€408 |
€1,010 |
As the Deputy will be aware, Home Building Finance Ireland ('HBFI') was established to increase the supply of new homes for owner-occupiers, renters and social housing by providing funding on commercial terms to house builders for commercially viable developments throughout Ireland, i.e. projects must generate reasonable/appropriate profit margins on development costs.
HBFI lending is therefore on commercial terms, in line with other residential finance providers in the market. The interest rates on facilities provided by HBFI comprise a margin over 3-month Euribor, with that margin based on the risk profile of each individual facility.
I am informed by HBFI that the average lending rate in 2024 was 6.45%, 2023 was 6.67%, 2022 was 6.8%, 2021 was 6.9%, 2020 was 6.98%.
HBFI continuously reviews its end-to-end processes to streamline where possible. It seeks feedback from customers and stakeholders on a regular basis, both formally via surveys, and informally via individual stakeholder meetings, the output of this feedback forming a key part of ongoing plans to refine processes.
I am informed by HBFI that 7% (37 deals) of total loan applications received by HBFI from inception to the end of 2024 have been declined. HBFI advise that the typical reasons why applications don’t proceed with HBFI include the project not being viable and therefore it does not progress at all, or the housebuilder secures funding from another provider.
296. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Minister for Finance the rational for the discrepancy between the rate of capital gains tax and the taxation rates on gains made from exchange-traded funds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32474/25]
View answerAn exchange traded fund (ETF) is an investment fund that is traded on a regulated stock exchange. A typical ETF can be compared to a tracker fund in that it will seek to replicate a particular index. There is no separate taxation regime specifically for ETFs. ETFs, being collective investment funds, generally come within the regimes set out in the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 for such funds. The domicile of the ETF will generally determine the applicable fund regime, specifically whether the ETF falls within the domestic fund regime or the offshore fund regime. This response confines itself to the position for domestic ETFs and ETFs deemed ‘equivalent’ to a domestic ETF located in the EU/EEA/OECD.
Capital gains tax (CGT) is paid on the chargeable capital gain made when you dispose of an asset. The chargeable gain is usually the difference between the price you paid for the asset and the price you disposed of it for. CGT is payable by the person making the disposal. The current approach to CGT in Ireland is a flat rate of 33% for all gains, together with a range of targeted reliefs including principal private residence relief, retirement relief and revised entrepreneur relief.
For domestic ETFs and ETFs deemed ‘equivalent’ to a domestic ETF located in the EU/EEA/OECD, the domestic funds regime applies. Under the domestic fund regime, a ‘gross roll-up’ applies such that there is no annual tax on income or gains arising to a fund, but the fund has responsibility to deduct an exit tax in respect of payments made to certain unit holders in that fund. To prevent indefinite or long-term deferral of this exit tax, a disposal is deemed to occur every 8 years. For ETFs while the fund is not required to apply an exit tax, the Irish resident unit holder will be subject to tax on income and gains arising and must self-assess and include details of income and gains in a timely filing on their income tax return to Revenue.
It is important to note that capital gains tax (CGT) and the taxation of EFTs are separate and apply in different circumstances. CGT generally relates to the disposal of a specific asset. ETFs make multiple disposals of assets over the lifetime of the fund which are not individually taxed, but the overall gains and income of the ETF are considered as part of the ‘gross roll up’ regime.
In summary where an Irish resident individual invests directly in a company by acquiring shares rather than investing in an ETF, any income payments received (dividends) are subject to income tax at the individual’s marginal rate and gains from the disposal of shares are subject to CGT. Where an individual has invested in a domestic ETF, the gross roll-up regime applies and there is no annual taxation of the income and gains of the fund, but taxation applies in certain circumstances including a deemed disposal every 8 years.
The taxation of investments was considered under the Funds Review recently conducted by my Department. In October 2024, my predecessor published the ‘Funds Sector 2030: A Framework for Open, Resilient & Developing Markets’, a wide-ranging review of the funds and asset management sector. This report sets out a series of recommendations to ensure that, in pursuit of continued growth in the funds and asset management sector, Ireland’s funds sector framework remains resilient, future-proofed, supportive of financial stability and a continued example of international best-practice. Recommendations 22 and 23 of the Fund Review Report include consideration of the removal of the eight-year deemed disposal requirement for Irish domiciled funds and life products and alignment of tax rates across different investment choices.
The 2025 Programme for Government has committed to progress and publish an implementation plan for consideration in Budget 2026 taking into consideration the Funds Review recommendations to unlock retail investment and opportunities to grow this sector in Ireland. This is a complex area of taxation that encompasses a wide breadth of tax legislation on domestic funds, life assurance products and offshore funds. Detailed consideration is therefore being given to the best way to bring about the necessary reforms and to support a greater level of retail investment in capital markets. It is likely given the breadth of the Funds Sector 2030 review that the delivery of any agreed associated tax measures will take place over multiple Finance Bill cycles. This work will also take account of developments at an EU level in respect of the Savings Investment Union.
