Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Tuesday, 24 Sep 2024

Written Answers Nos. 99-118

Road Projects

Ceisteanna (99)

Ged Nash

Ceist:

99. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Transport when his Department received a feasibility study application from Louth County Council in connection with the proposed development of phase three of the port access northern cross route in north Drogheda (the phase of the road crossing the Dublin to Belfast railway line); the support that will be provided by his Department for the study; when the study is scheduled to be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37539/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

In accordance with the provisions of Section 13 of the Roads Act 1993, each local authority has statutory responsibility for the improvement and maintenance of their regional and local roads. Works on those roads are funded from local authorities' own resources and are supplemented by State Road grants. Of these grants, the vast majority (approximately 90%) are targeted at the maintenance and renewal of the existing network with c. 10% of the remaining funding invested in new roads/bridges or for road realignments.Louth County Council is the statutory planning and road authority in its functional area. It is, therefore, a matter for Louth County Council to consider options regarding the development of the proposed Port Access Northern Cross Route (PANCR) scheme in Drogheda.It should be noted that there is a limited budget available for projects under the Regional and Local Road Strategic Grant Programme and that, under the Infrastructure Guidelines (formerly the Public Spending Code), a Project/Programme Outline Document is required for all projects which are estimated to cost in excess of €15 million (previously €10 million). A Project Outline Document has been received by my Department from Louth County Council in connection with a Phase 3 of the PANCR and following consideration by my officials was returned for further consideration by Louth County Council. Louth County Council was not given an allocation in 2024 for further phases of the PANCR scheme.

Taxi Regulations

Ceisteanna (100)

Duncan Smith

Ceist:

100. Deputy Duncan Smith asked the Minister for Transport if he will engage with the National Transport Authority to secure vehicle license extensions for taxi drivers who registered from 2015 to 2019 who, through no fault of their own, only received seven-and-a-half years of usage from their vehicles due to the Covid-19 pandemic, with consideration given to the growing need to grow the Irish taxi fleet; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37550/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

The regulation of the small public service vehicle (SPSV) industry, including vehicle age limits for SPSVs, is a matter for the independent transport regulator, the National Transport Authority (NTA), under the provisions of the Consolidated Taxi Regulation Act 2013 and 2016. I have no role in the day-to-day operations of the SPSV industry.

Regulations made by the NTA in 2010 first established a maximum permissible age of 10 years for new standard taxis and hackneys. The ten-year rule was adopted in recognition of the need to strike a balance between achieving standards that offer the customer confidence, comfort, and safety, and allowing industry members to operate successfully.

The Taxi Regulation Acts 2013 and 2016 require the NTA to seek to promote the provision and maintenance of quality services by small public service vehicles and their drivers. Taxi Regulation (Small Public Service Vehicle) Regulations 2015 continued the age limit for taxis and hackneys as, in general, less than 10 years old and always of a condition and quality suitable to provide SPSV services.The NTA's extension of age limits during Covid-19 was an emergency measure of a temporary nature, taken in recognition of the particular challenges posed by the pandemic and was specifically aimed at ensuring that no operator would be required to change their vehicle while passenger demand remained low, and there was a lack suitable vehicles available for purchase. The 2022 Regulations amend Regulation 31 (Maximum Permissible Age Requirements) of the Taxi Regulation (Small Public Service Vehicle) Regulations 2015. This amendment was made as an exceptional provision and contingency measure, as a result of vehicle supply issues. The Regulations also provide for a graduated return to the ten-year age limit, with vehicles whose 10-year limit was originally in 2020 or 2021 now extended to 2025; those whose original limit is in 2022 or 2023 now extended to 2026, and those whose original limit will be reached in 2024, extended to 2027.

The impact of the 2022 Regulations has been under continuous review and the NTA does not anticipate introducing any further maximum permissible age extensions, as the instigating factors no longer exist.

Grants which are administered by the NTA, are available for drivers looking to purchase new vehicles. The eSPSV Grant Scheme is available to persons (individuals or companies) applying for new SPSV licences or existing SPSV licence holders who wish to upgrade their current vehicle with a replacement electric vehicle. Applicants can avail of up to €25,000 in grant funding under this Scheme. The WAV Grant is available to provide financial support towards the acquisition or conversion of suitable vehicles to operate as WAVs in the SPSV fleet. Applicants can avail of up to €17,500 in grant funding under this Scheme.

Bus Éireann

Ceisteanna (101)

Pádraig O'Sullivan

Ceist:

101. Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Transport if he will engage with Bus Éireann regarding concerns in relation to a bus route in Cork (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37566/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

As Minister for Transport, I have responsibility for policy and overall funding in relation to public transport; however, I am not involved in the day-to-day operations of public transport.

The query raised by the Deputy is an operational matter for Bus Éireann. I have, therefore, referred the Deputy's question to the company for direct reply. Please advise my private office if you do not receive a reply within ten working days.

Freedom of Information

Ceisteanna (102)

Carol Nolan

Ceist:

102. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Transport the total number of freedom of information requests submitted to his Department in 2022, 2023 and to date in 2024; the total number of such requests that were rejected in their entirety; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37606/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

The total number of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests submitted to my Department in the years 2022, 2023 and to date in 2024, and the total number of FOI requests that were rejected are set out in the table below:

Year

Total FOI Requests Received

Total Number of FOI Requests Rejected

Number Refused under Section 15(1)(a)

2022

226

61

31

2023

208

63

34

2024 up to 19/09/2024

176

39

20

The majority of these refusals were on the basis of what is termed an administrative refusal under Section 15(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2014, which provides that a Freedom of Information request may be refused to be granted where the record concerned does not exist, or cannot be found after all reasonable steps to ascertain its whereabouts have been taken.

Other refusals by my Department are, for example, made under Section 29 of the Freedom of Information Act, where the request sought records that were subject to ongoing deliberative process; or Section 36, to protect commercially sensitive information of third parties.

Officials acting as Decision Makers on Freedom of Information requests received by my Department endeavour to take a proactive approach to the handling of Freedom of Information requests, engaging with the requesters to assist them further, which can include assisting in refining a request, or in directing requesters to other relevant public bodies, or pointing to information or records that are already in the public domain, for example, on the Department's website. In general the approach in the Department is to aim to proactively make information available to minimise the need for individuals to seek information through the FOI route.

Requesters are also always made aware of their right of appeal, if they are not satisfied with any FOI decision issued by my Department.

Driver Test

Ceisteanna (103)

Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Ceist:

103. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Transport to provide a list of each of the driving test centres in the State, in tabular form; the average and longest ongoing waiting times between applying for a test, getting an appointment to book a test, and sitting a test at each centre; and his plans to reduce waiting times. [37622/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

Under the Road Safety Authority Act 2006, the operation of the National Driver Testing Service is the statutory responsibility of the Road Safety Authority (RSA) and the information requested is held by that organisation. I have therefore referred the question to the Authority for direct reply. I would ask the Deputy to contact my office if a response has not been received within ten days.

To address issues of rising demand and waiting times for a driving test, in March 2023 the Department of Transport conveyed sanction for the RSA to recruit up to 75 additional driver testers on a temporary basis.

More recently, and in line with the conditions set out in the 2023 sanction, the RSA submitted a business case to the Department in June 2024 regarding long-term, permanent staffing needs for the service to cater to current and future demand. The Department conveyed sanction the beginning of September for 70 additional driver testing posts on a permanent basis, bringing the permanent sanction to 200. This is double the sanctioned permanent headcount in June 2022, which was 100 testers. As part of this sanction, my officials have requested that a plan is put in place to restore waiting times to the service level agreement of 10 weeks as soon as possible.

The Deputy may wish to know that the RSA has recently started publishing detailed monthly information on the driver testing service on the CSO website, including the breakdown of waiting times and distribution of testing capacity by test centre. This information can be accessed at the following link: data.cso.ie/product/rsadts .

A referred reply was forwarded to the Deputy under Standing Order 51.

Active Travel

Ceisteanna (104)

Steven Matthews

Ceist:

104. Deputy Steven Matthews asked the Minister for Transport if he will consider extending the rollout of secure bike lockers at commuter train stations including Greystones and Wicklow town; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37751/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

As the Deputy may be aware, the National Transport Authority (NTA) has responsibility for the planning and development of public transport infrastructure, including, in consultation with Iarnród Éireann, bike lockers at train stations.

Noting the NTA's responsibility in this matter and the specific issues raised by the Deputy, I have referred the Deputies' questions to the NTA for a more detailed reply. Please contact my private office if you do not receive a reply within 10 days.

A referred reply was forwarded to the Deputy under Standing Order 51.

Transport Infrastructure Ireland

Ceisteanna (105)

Niamh Smyth

Ceist:

105. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Transport if the Transport Infrastructure Ireland funding for national primary and secondary roads has been frozen; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37752/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

As Minister for Transport I have responsibility for overall policy and exchequer funding in relation to the National Roads Programme. Under the Roads Acts 1993-2015 and in line with the National Development Plan (NDP), the operation and management of individual national roads is a matter for Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. This is also subject to the Infrastructure Guidelines and the necessary statutory approvals.

There has been no reduction to the overall capital funding available for national roads in 2024, which was announced at the start of the year. A number of new road projects are facing funding pressures in 2024 due to reasons including an increased pace of delivery and land acquisition costs, as well as inflation and increased cost of materials which are higher than when the original estimates were calculated. This means the allocation will be spread on fewer projects than originally anticipated. This has resulted in the need to postpone some asset renewal works to ensure that the delivery of major new roads projects can continue. This is particularly the case where existing contracts are in place. It is important to note that any postponement is temporary in nature.

In order to ensure the continued delivery of these important projects, earlier this year TII proposed to postpone some asset renewal works on the existing network, including work to renew pavement, until 2025 or as soon as possible thereafter. In addition, some Greenways funding will be used to advance active travel infrastructure on the national road network, which would otherwise be funded from the roads budget. This will allow funding to be directed to new roads projects. It is important to point out that Safety Improvement Schemes will not be effected by these measures.

Greenways Provision

Ceisteanna (106)

Aindrias Moynihan

Ceist:

106. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Transport for consideration in providing a greenway from a village to a forest park (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37753/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

As Minister for Transport, I have responsibility for overall policy and exchequer funding in relation to Greenways. The planning, design, and construction of individual Greenways is a matter for Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), in conjunction with the local authorities concerned.

I understand that TII do not currently have a greenway planned between the village of Béal Átha an Ghaorthaidh, Co Chorcaí to Gougane Barra National Forest Park. For new projects to be considered, Cork County Council would need to carry out an initial assessment on the rationale for the proposal and, if appropriate, submit a request to TII for the provision of funds. This would then be assessed for feasibility and prioritisation against all other applications for funding.

Greenways Provision

Ceisteanna (107)

Aindrias Moynihan

Ceist:

107. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Transport the position on progressing the delivery of a greenway from a town to a nature preserve (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37754/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

As Minister for Transport, I have responsibility for overall policy and exchequer funding in relation to Greenways. The planning, design, and construction of individual Greenways is a matter for Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), in conjunction with the local authorities concerned.

I understand that TII do not currently have a greenway planned from the town of Macroom to The Gearagh nature reserve in County Cork. For new projects to be considered, Cork County Council would need to carry out an initial assessment on the rationale for the proposal and, if appropriate, submit a request to TII for the provision of funds. This would then be assessed for feasibility and prioritisation against all other applications for funding.

The town of Macroom is included in the study area of the N22 Baile Bhuirne to Macroom Active Travel scheme, for which Cork County Council received a €250,000 funding allocation in 2024 to progress feasibility and option selection. The scheme aims to improve active travel measures from west of Baile Bhuirne to east of Macroom town, along the length of the now-bypassed “old N22” route. It is envisaged that the scheme will be delivered in phases, concentrating on the village and town centres first. The provision of Active Travel measures in Baile Bhuirne and Macroom remain subject to further appraisal steps, any applicable Statutory Approvals and funding availability.

EU Funding

Ceisteanna (108)

Denis Naughten

Ceist:

108. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Transport the projects and programmes with his Department which have been allocated funding under the EU's Recovery and Resilience Programme; the funds drawn down to date in each instance; the profiled drawdown in each of the forthcoming years of the programme; the steps he is taking to ensure that projects and programmes are completed within the specified timeframe; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37797/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

Deputy,

Please see below table setting out the funding and expenditure profiles for the Cork Commuter Rail project, which is funded under the EU's Recovery and Resilience Programme.

-

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

-

€m

€m

€m

€m

€m

€m

€m

Profiled Drawdown

0

3.32

8.87

27.1

71.92

49.21

25

Funds drawn down to date

0

*

*

21.3

19.3 (to date)

**2021 and 2022 figures to be confirmed by Irish Rail

The Cork Area Commuter Rail Programme is the only project under this Department's remit funded under the EU's Recovery and Resilience Programme. The Cork Area Commuter Rail Programme is noted as a key project in the National Development Plan 2021-2030 and the Cork Metropolitan Area Transport Strategy 2040. The programme comprises a number of separate but interrelated projects.

Phase 1 of the Cork Area Commuter Rail Programme, ‘Enable future electrification of Cork Commuter Rail’, was included in Ireland’s National Recovery & Resilience Plan as submitted to the European Commission in 2021. All works associated with Phase 1 will be completed by Quarter 3 2026 as required by the European Commission.

This will see profiled EU funds invested in Cork’s rail infrastructure, which will facilitate the longer-term electrification of the network through construction of a new ‘through’ platform at Kent Station to create an integrated suburban network, re-signalling of the network, and double-tracking from Glounthaune to Midleton.

Rail Network

Ceisteanna (109)

Michael Lowry

Ceist:

109. Deputy Michael Lowry asked the Minister for Transport if he supports the integration of a new DART station at Croke Park; if he will engage with Irish Rail, an organisation (details supplied) and other relevant state agencies to proactively facilitate the development of this station, considering Irish Rail's ownership of the railway frontage and the willingness of the organisation to yield additional land required for the station; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37802/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

As the Deputy may be aware, the National Transport Authority (NTA) has responsibility for the planning and development of public transport infrastructure, including, in consultation with Iarnród Éireann, any proposed new train stations.

Noting the NTA's responsibility in this matter and the specific issues raised by the Deputy, I have referred the Deputies' questions to the NTA for a more detailed reply. Please contact my private office if you do not receive a reply within 10 days.

A referred reply was forwarded to the Deputy under Standing Order 51.

Departmental Correspondence

Ceisteanna (110)

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

Ceist:

110. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Transport when his Departmental officials will respond to correspondence from the family of a person (details supplied); and if he will examine their points of concern as they pertain to the responsibilities of agencies in this jurisdiction and consult with the Road Safety Authority as to a substantive response. [37890/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

I can confirm that the correspondence in relation to this case was received by the Department, and a response was issued last week. I sincerely apologise for the delay in responding in this instance.

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on the incident or the criminal case against the haulage company as the incident happened outside this jurisdiction. The enforcement of road traffic legislation in Northern Ireland is a matter for the Northern Ireland authorities.

However, the Road Safety Authority (RSA) has statutory responsibility for the operation and oversight of roadworthiness testing in the State. I understand that the RSA is aware of this case and all the required compliance checks have been carried out along with the necessary enforcement proceedings. I can assure you that the RSA takes all cases of non-compliance extremely seriously and all the necessary enforcement steps are taken when any cases of non-compliance are found or reported.

Public Transport

Ceisteanna (111)

Michael Lowry

Ceist:

111. Deputy Michael Lowry asked the Minister for Transport if he will introduce free public transport for students in Budget 2025 to alleviate the high travel expenses faced by students; if he will consider implementing a bike-to-college scheme, which is a key ask of an organisation (details supplied) in its pre-Budget 2025 submission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37918/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

Funding was provided under Budget 2024 for the continuation of the 20% average fare reduction on PSO services, and for an extension of the upper limit of the YAC/student leap from 23 to 25 years of age, which provides a 50% fare reduction for those in third level education. Public transport fare initiatives will form part of my discussions with the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform in the context of Budget 2025 negotiations.

While I welcomed the introduction of an increase in the Cycle-to-Work scheme thresholds in recent Budgets, I recognise that such an incentive does target a specific cohort of the population and is not universally available. While the Cycle-to-Work scheme falls under the remit of the Department of Finance, Department of Transport officials liaise with their counterparts in that Department in relation to the introduction of various transport related tax measures, particularly in the period preceding the annual Budget.

I will ask my officials to bear your suggestion in mind, regarding a Bike-to-College scheme, during these negotiations going forward. My Department will continue to undertake research into potential additional measures which could be introduced to promote modal shift and encourage uptake of cycling across all demographics going forward.

Legislative Programme

Ceisteanna (112)

Joan Collins

Ceist:

112. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for Transport if he will introduce the horse-drawn carriages Bill, which was listed on his legislative programme for summer 2024. [37958/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

The current legislation in operation regarding horse-drawn carriages in Dublin City is the Dublin Carriages Act 1853-1855. Local authorities in other areas can regulate horse-drawn carriages under the Local Government Act 2001.

Due to a provision in the Local Government Act 2001 that prevents local authorities from making bye-laws where power exists elsewhere in legislation, Dublin City Council has no legal basis currently to make bye-laws to regulate horse drawn carriages as provision already exists under the Dublin Carriages Act 1853-1855.

The development of new legislation requires the repeal of legislation which pre-dates the foundation of the State. My Department had planned to undertake stakeholder consultations in 2024 and unfortunately this has been delayed due to conflicting legislative priorities. However, work to ensure that Dublin City Council is provided with an appropriate legal basis to regulate this area is currently ongoing and the Horse Drawn Carriages Bill is listed on the Government’s Legislative Programme for Autumn 2024.

Tax Reliefs

Ceisteanna (113, 118)

Holly Cairns

Ceist:

113. Deputy Holly Cairns asked the Minister for Finance the reason for the exclusion of mead, categorised often as other fermented beverages, specifically those sold under CN code 2206, from the small cider producer excise relief scheme; and if he will consider including it in Budget 2025. [37308/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Christopher O'Sullivan

Ceist:

118. Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Finance the reason for the exclusion of mead from the small cider and perry producer excise relief scheme, specifically those drinks produced under CN code 2206 categorised as other fermented beverages; and if he will consider including this category in Budget 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37518/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

I propose to take Questions Nos. 113 and 118 together.

Council Directive 92/83/EEC (as amended) and Council Directive 92/84/EEC set out the EU rules for the harmonisation of excise duty structures and rates for alcohol and alcoholic beverages. These rules provide uniform definitions for excise product categories, lay down the tax base and structures applicable to the various alcohol products, establish minimum excise duty rates, and set the conditions for any reduced rates or special regimes. Under the EU rules, one of the product categories is ‘Other Fermented Beverages’ (OFBs). Some changes were made to the EU rules in 2020, including the introduction of a new provision that allows Member States the discretion to apply an excise relief (reduced rate scheme) for small independent producers of OFBs. Member States who choose to apply such a relief are permitted to limit it to certain types of OFBs.

Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the Finance Act 2003 (as amended) transposes the Directives into Irish law. This law identifies two groups of OFBs: ‘cider and perry’ and ‘OFBs – other than cider and perry’. The law defines ‘cider and perry’ with reference to their strength and content. Essentially, they are made from fermented apple or pear juice. The second group, ‘OFBs – other than cider and perry’, covers all other OFBs, for example, fruit wines, or fermented products such as mead.

In Budget 2023, the Minister for Finance announced his decision to introduce a reduced rate scheme for small producers of ‘cider and perry’. The legislation for this was enacted in Finance Act 2022 and the relief came into operation from 1 January 2023.

The relief applies to small producers of ‘cider and perry’. Mead is not ‘cider and perry’ and so is not covered by the provisions of the relief scheme.

As the Deputy will be aware it is a longstanding practice of the Minister for Finance not to comment, in advance of the budget, on any tax matters that might be the subject of budget decisions.

Tax Code

Ceisteanna (114)

Seán Canney

Ceist:

114. Deputy Seán Canney asked the Minister for Finance if he intends to increase the income threshold for personal income tax from €18,000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37399/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

The age exemption applies for any year of assessment where an individual is aged 65 years or over and his or her total income does not exceed €18,000 per annum. Where an individual is a married person or civil partner and is jointly assessed to tax, the age exemption will apply where either individual is aged 65 or over and where the couple’s total income does not exceed €36,000 per annum. The relevant income thresholds may be increased further if the individual has a qualifying child. The thresholds are increased by €575 in respect of both the first and second child, and €830 in respect of each subsequent child.

Additionally, marginal relief may be available where the individual’s or couple’s income exceeds the relevant exemption limit but is less than twice that amount. Where marginal relief applies the individual or couple is taxed at 40 per cent on all income above the exemption limit to a ceiling of twice the exemption limit. The system of marginal relief ensures that in cases where an individual's or couple’s income rises above the exemption threshold that their net income will not decline, as the 40 per cent income tax rate only applies to the proportion of income above the threshold. Once the income exceeds twice the exemption limit, marginal relief is no longer available and the individual pays tax under the normal tax system. However, where the individual’s or couple’s income is greater than the exemption limit but below twice that limit, the taxpayer is entitled to the benefit of the more favourable treatment between the use of marginal relief or the normal tax system of credits and bands.

I have no plans to increase the age exemption limits. However, in circumstances where an individual or couple no longer benefits from the age exemption or marginal relief they will benefit from the increases to the main personal tax credits in recent Budgets.

The increases to the main personal tax credits in Budget 2024 (€100 increase to the single, employee and earned income credits and a €200 increase to the credit for married couples/civil partnerships) means that the effective entry point to income tax has increased for all taxpayers, including those aged 65 or older. From 2024, the effective entry point to income tax for an individual in receipt of the single person credit, employee/earned income credit and the age credit has increased by €1,000 per annum from €18,975 to €19,975 per annum.

In addition, it is important to take into account that the current tax arrangements for persons aged 65 or older compare favourably with the tax treatment of the generality of taxpayers. Persons aged 65 or over may also avail of the age tax credit, which currently amounts to €245 per year for single persons or €490 per year for married couples or civil partners. Reduced rates of USC also apply for persons aged 70 or older where their total income is €60,000 or less per annum. Social welfare income such as the State Contributory Pension and State Non-Contributory Pension are excluded from the calculation when determining if an individual’s income has exceeded the €60,000 income threshold. Furthermore, the State Contributory Pension and the State Non-Contributory Pension are not chargeable to USC or Pay Related Social Insurance.

The Commission on Taxation and Welfare recommended that age should be removed as a factor for determining the charge to income tax and USC. The report stated that the determination of an individual’s tax treatment based on age narrows the base and breaches the concept of horizontal equity, whereby those with similar income should pay the same proportion of that income in taxes. It also breaches the concept of intergenerational equity. Further details are set out in the Report of the Commission, at the following link - www.gov.ie/en/publication/7fbeb-report-of-the-commission/.

Finally, as part of the Personal Tax Review published on last year’s Budget Day, my Department set out further analysis of the recommendations of the Commission on Taxation and Welfare, including in respect of the age exemption limits. The Report is available at the following link -www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/273335/96f70eb1-64e1-4f02-9096-e36f306a048b.pdf#page=null.

General Practitioner Services

Ceisteanna (115)

Neasa Hourigan

Ceist:

115. Deputy Neasa Hourigan asked the Minister for Finance if he will ensure that changes to tax requirements under Section 1008A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 for general medical practitioners under general medical services scheme contracts (limiting partnerships to other GPs only) will not adversely damage existing non-profit practices, where the partner is a charitable organisation, forcing them to close in deprived urban areas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37437/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

My Department, the Department of Health and Revenue have, for some time, been aware of issues arising from contractual arrangements within the General Practitioner (GP) community whereby some GPs treat income under their General Medical Services (GMS) contract as income of a GP practice in which they are a partner or an employee, rather than income of that individual GP.

The core issue concerns the contractual arrangements involving GPs; the Health Act, 1970 authorises the HSE to enter into a contractual relationship with individual GPs for the delivery of GMS services. The HSE does not enter into GMS contracts with a medical practice, whether the practice is structured as a partnership or a company. This means that, as a matter of law, income under a GMS contract belongs to the GP who entered into the contract with the HSE - this legal position was confirmed in a Tax Appeals Commission determination issued in January 2022.

It was in this context that Revenue issued guidance last year to clarify the position and allowed GPs a period of time, up to the end of 2023 to adjust their arrangements. Revenue's guidance clarifies that a GP who holds a GMS contract is, under tax legislation, a chargeable person as regards income arising under the GMS contract and should report that income under the self-assessment system. This legal position does not change because a GP is a contracted employee of a medical practice and has nominated their GMS income to be paid into the bank account of a medical practice rather than into their personal bank account.

The Deputy has referenced section 1008A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (TCA), which was introduced in Finance (No. 2) Act 2023. Section 1008A provides that where individual GPs enter into contracts with the HSE to provide certain medical services and provide those services in the conduct of a partnership profession with other individual GPs, the income from those services can be treated for income tax purposes, to be that of the partnership, where a joint election is made. It is important to note that this treatment applies only in the case of partnerships involving partners who are all individuals and medical practitioners. Section 1008A does not operate to treat GMS income of an employee of a partnership as income of the partnership, nor does it apply to, or change, the tax situation for doctors who are employees of a partnership or other arrangement, including corporates (including not for profit entities). It is also limited only to income arising from GMS and certain ancillary medical services income.

Section 1008A TCA is being perceived as a change to the legal position for all GP practices, which is not the case. The provision did not change the underlying legal position that the individual GP is the chargeable person as regards income arising under the GMS contract.

When the section was introduced, it was noted that it is expected to resolve some, but not all, of the issues arising from the GPs' contractual arrangements. This is because there are a number of business arrangements and models in the GP sector, including partnerships, companies, employees and employers. It was further noted, therefore, that the Department of Health had agreed to this approach and had confirmed that the Strategic Review of General Practice, which is currently underway, would examine the relevant HSE contracts and propose measures necessary to modernise them.

Although I am conscious of the difficulties being experienced by GP practices, I must be cognisant of existing legislation and contract law. There is currently no legal basis for Revenue to treat income belonging to an individual contracted GP as income of another person, or incorporated charity. For this reason, the transitional arrangement which Revenue put in place until end-2023 could not be extended beyond that date.

As the core issue concerns the contractual arrangements between individual GPs and the HSE, it would not be appropriate for my Department to propose legislation which would treat income belonging to an individual contracted GP as income of an incorporated charity. As such, I have referred this matter to my colleague, the Minister for Health, for his consideration and hope that an appropriate solution can be found.

Tax Code

Ceisteanna (116)

James O'Connor

Ceist:

116. Deputy James O'Connor asked the Minister for Finance if he will address the points raised in correspondence regarding tax treatment of exchange traded funds (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37514/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

I note the Deputy's query regarding the taxation of Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs). I am advised by Revenue that there is no separate taxation regime specifically for ETFs. Being collective investment funds, they 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.

To assist taxpayers in determining the appropriate tax treatment for investments in ETFs, Revenue has published guidance which is available at www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/income-tax-capital-gains-tax-corporation-tax/part-27/27-01a-03.pdf. This guidance provides a roadmap to detailed guidance for the different types of ETF.

The domestic fund regime applies in the case of an Irish domiciled ETF or a foreign domiciled ETF that is deemed equivalent to an Irish domiciled ETF. Under this regime, a ‘gross roll-up’ taxation regime applies such that there is no annual tax on income or gains arising. Rather, tax generally arises for a unit holder where value passes from the ETF to the unit holder either in the form of income (dividends) or gains on the disposal of the units. To prevent indefinite or long-term deferral of tax, a unit holder is deemed to dispose of the units every 8 years, with any gain arising being taxable. The rate of tax is 41% unless the fund is a Personal Portfolio Investment Undertaking in which case tax at 60% applies.

For a foreign domiciled ETF that is not deemed equivalent to a domestic ETF, the applicable tax treatment in respect of income and gains arising in respect of the investment will depend on the territory in which the ETF is located. If it is located in the EU, EEA or OECD, then the general principles of tax will apply such that:

• income payments (dividends) will be subject to income tax at the standard or higher rate as appropriate and taxed under Case III of Schedule D, and

• gains on disposals will be subject to capital gains tax (CGT) at 33%.

Any tax arising must be paid under the self-assessment system.

Where an ETF is not located in the EU, EEA and OECD, the offshore fund regime applies, the applicable tax treatment of income and gains arising from the investment will depend on whether the fund is considered a distributing or non-distributing ETF.

Broadly, a distributing ETF is a fund located in another territory (other than in the EU, EEA or certain OECD countries), that distributes its profits to its unit holders from year to year. The default position is that unless a fund applies to, and is certified by, Revenue as a distributing fund, it is a non-distributing fund. The list of distributing funds approved by Revenue is published on the Revenue website at: www.revenue.ie/en/companies-and-charities/documents/list-distributing-offshore-funds.pdf.

Investments in distributing ETFs are taxed as follows:

• income payments from a distributing offshore ETF are subject to income tax under the general principles of taxation. USC and PRSI may therefore be applicable.

• gains arising on disposals are subject to CGT at a rate of 40%.

• the individual must account for any tax due under self-assessment.

A non-distributing ETF is a fund located in another territory (other than in the EU, EEA or certain OECD countries) and is not certified as a distributing ETF. Investments in non-distributing ETFs are taxed as follows:

• income payments are subject to income tax under the general principles of taxation. USC and PRSI may be applicable.

• gains arising on disposals of an investment in a non-distributing offshore ETF are charged to income tax under Case IV. Although these disposals are charged to income tax, the amount of the gain on the disposal is calculated according to general CGT rules. USC and PRSI may be applicable.

• the individual must account for any tax due under self-assessment.

The Form 11 is a tax return for self-assessed individuals to declare their income, claim tax credits, and calculate their tax liability. I am informed by Revenue that the Personal Details Panel of the return must always be completed; however, if taxpayers have no entries to make under a particular category, they should leave it blank and proceed to the next section. The majority (98%) of taxpayers file their Form 11 electronically using ROS. On ROS, the filer can navigate directly to the sections relevant to them and identify mandatory fields, making it easier to file the return.

Revenue’s Tax and Duty Manual on Exchange Traded Funds provides information on the tax treatment of ETFs and directs taxpayers to the relevant section (Offshore Funds) that should be completed on the Form 11 in respect of income. Electronic filers have an option to “add additional investments” when completing the Offshore Funds section. Therefore, multiple entries can be included where a number of investments have been made.

When returning gains on the disposal of units in a non-equivalent ETF fund or a non-distributing ETF form, the CG1 form may be used.

It should be noted that on 6 April 2023, the former Minister for Finance published the terms of reference for a review of Ireland’s funds sector and some related taxation issues.

A draft report was submitted to me for consideration in recent weeks and this is in line with the Review’s Terms of the Reference. The review was wide ranging and examined a range of issues relevant to the funds sector. As part of my consideration of the draft report, I will consider the exact timing of the publication of the Funds Review.

Redundancy Payments

Ceisteanna (117)

James O'Connor

Ceist:

117. Deputy James O'Connor asked the Minister for Finance his plans to increase the €200,000 lifetime limit on ex-gratia lump-sum payments for those at risk of redundancy (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37515/24]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa

The matter of whether a payment made to an individual is a redundancy or termination payment, and a statutory or ex-gratia element of same, depends on the specific circumstances of each individual case and may sometimes give rise to tax implications.

By way of background, the Redundancy Payment Act 1967 imposes a statutory obligation on employers to recompense employees dismissed for reasons of redundancy, laid off or kept on part time for a minimum period. This includes statutory redundancy, which is calculated on the basis of two weeks’ pay per year of service, plus one additional week, subject to a maximum weekly pay figure of €600. Section 203 Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (TCA) exempts from income tax any payment arising in respect of statutory redundancy.

A taxpayer might also receive a lump sum payment as part of a redundancy. A liability to tax arises on the amount of the payment that exceeds either the:

• Basic exemption and increased exemption, if due, or

• Standard Capital Superannuation Benefit (SCSB).

The Basic Exemption is €10,160 plus €765 for each complete year that a taxpayer worked for their employer. A termination payment will be tax free if it does not exceed the Basic Exemption.

Additionally, a taxpayer may be entitled to an increase of €10,000 on the basis exemption if:

They have not received an amount in excess of the basic exemption in the previous ten years, and,

They are not a member of an occupational pension scheme, or, if they are a member of an occupational pension scheme, but they revoke their entitlement to receive a tax-free lump sum from that scheme.

The SCSB if a further relief taxpayer may be entitled to and is provided in Schedule 3 of the TCA. SCSB is computed at 1/15th of a taxpayer’s average annual pay for the last 36 months in employment. This is then multiplied by the number of complete years of service with the employer. Any tax-free lump sum payments received, or which the taxpayer is entitled to receive, from their work pension, are subtracted from this benefit. The basic exemption, increased exemption and the SCSB are subject to a lifetime limit of €200,000 and the individual may apply whichever of the three exemptions is most beneficial. This lifetime limit is only applicable to ex-gratia lump sum payments which might arise as part of a redundancy package and if any individual receives an amount exceeding the €200,000, the balance would be subject to income tax.

Section 201 TCA contains the provisions which provide for the basic exemption, increased exemption, and lifetime exemption limit of €200,000, in respect of additional ex-gratia payments which might arise as part of a redundancy.

If a person is in a marriage or civil partnership, his or her entitlement to exemption against a lump sum payment is calculated independently of their spouse or civil partner. This applies whether the person is taxed under joint assessment, separate assessment, or separate treatment.

The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (DETE) provides guidance on an individual’s statutory redundancy entitlements, and further information on same can be found on their website at:

enterprise.gov.ie/en/what-we-do/workplace-and-skills/redundancy-payments/ .

In addition, the Revenue website sets out further information on the tax treatment of lump sum termination payments in the hands of the employee, and that information is accessible at:

www.revenue.ie/en/personal-tax-credits-reliefs-and-exemptions/lump-sum-payments/index.aspx .

The current rules in relation to the tax treatment of redundancy and termination payments are well established. While it is the case that all tax measures are kept under review, I do not currently have any plans to make changes to these reliefs and exemption thresholds.

Question No. 118 answered with Question No. 113.
Roinn