Written Answers Nos. 418-438
418. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the point at which it becomes a matter for the Houses of the Oireachtas when a statutory tribunal confirms an accountability gap that only the executive has the power to fix (details supplied);; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10038/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI understand that the Deputy is referring to the Irish Financial Services Appeals Tribunal (IFSAT) ‘Shane Kavanagh v The Central Bank of Ireland’ (Appeal Ref 030/2025) which is publicly available: www.ifsat.ie/decisions/shane-kavanagh-v-the-central-bank-of-ireland/.
IFSAT is an independent tribunal which hears and determines appeals from aggrieved parties against certain decisions of the Central Bank of Ireland. The legislative basis for IFSAT is set out in Chapter VIIA of the Central Bank Act, 1942 (as amended).
In its published decision in the above case the Tribunal concluded that no statutory provision had been cited or identified which would confer upon the Tribunal (IFSAT) jurisdiction to consider the various allegations made by the Applicant. Specifically, in its decision the Tribunal concluded “the Tribunal must conclude that the Applicant has not identified an “appealable decision” to the Tribunal" which is a requirement for the Tribunal.
It should also be noted that the IFSAT decision stated: “It is also important to note that the Applicant’s concerns are allegations against the Central Bank. Nothing in this decision constitutes any finding that these allegations are correct or substantiated.”
IFSAT has no jurisdiction to examine the Central Bank’s general supervisory strategy or to review the Bank's decisions in respect of any supervisory actions it may take. This is not a mistake or an oversight – this is by design. IFSAT must act within the powers conferred on it since it is a body which determines appeals made by aggrieved parties against certain decisions of the Central Bank.
In the broader context, the Central Bank of Ireland has an extensive body of domestic and EU legislation it must enforce and it is independent in carrying out its functions. This independence is required so that the Bank can work across its different responsibilities: monetary policy, undertaking regulatory and supervisory functions/decisions and, importantly, so that the Bank can focus on its mandate as set out in law. Government and the legislature are generally engaged in respect of financial services legislation where regulatory or supervisory powers need to be amended or updated.
Within the overall legal framework, the Bank is required to assess risk, prioritise issues, and allocate regulatory and supervisory resources in a way that ensures effective system-wide oversight. This legal framework provides for proportionate actions. Regulatory and supervisory decisions must align with EU and national obligations, statutory duties and proportionality principles.
Furthermore, prudential oversight of Irish banks is now undertaken by the Central Bank in close coordination with European Authorities. Since 2014 the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) has been in force which makes the European Central Bank (ECB) the competent authority for banking supervision both in Ireland and the rest of the euro area. This was not the case during the Global Financial Crisis.
The SSM divides institutions into two distinct categories: Significant Institutions (SIs) and Less Significant Institutions (LSIs).
SIs are supervised directly by Joint Supervisory Teams (JSTs). JSTs are formed of staff of the ECB and the relevant national supervisors. So for institutions authorised in Ireland, the relevant JSTs have members in both Frankfurt and Dublin. The size, overall composition and organisation of a JST is tailored to the size, business model and risk profile of the bank it supervises. SI’s in Ireland are AIB Group plc, Bank of American Europe Designated Activity Company, Bank of Ireland Group plc, Barclays Bank Ireland plc and Citibank Europe plc.
Smaller entities, LSIs, are supervised directly by the Central Bank of Ireland with indirect supervision from the ECB. The ECB, which has ultimate responsibility for the functioning of the SSM, may issue guidelines to ensure consistent supervision or assume direct supervision of an institution in certain circumstances.
Finally, the Central Bank is further publicly accountable with annual reports submitted to government, appearances at Oireachtas committees, regular public statements on monetary and regulatory actions, supervisory expectations publications and by the enforcement actions it carries out.
419. Deputy Naoise Ó Muirí asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance his views on the way in which Ireland can insulate itself from potential trade shocks that may arise from recent events in Venezuela. [1753/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraDespite trade, geopolitical and other headwinds, the economy performed well last year. The resilience of the economy is, of course, encouraging but we cannot become complacent.
Indeed, uncertainty remains elevated and Government is acutely aware of the substantial risks to the economic outlook. These risks are primarily external in nature.
While Ireland has limited direct exposure to the Venezuelan economy, the geopolitical events of recent weeks – and indeed the past year - underscore the need to prioritise what we can control.
That is why Government is focused on protecting jobs, boosting our competitiveness, and reinforcing the resilience of our economy and public finances.
Continued investment in key strategic infrastructure is crucial to help maintain competitiveness and boost productivity. To this end, the National Development Plan sets out how the Government intends to allocate investment toward the strategic objectives of energy, water, housing and transport.
Moreover, the Action Plan on Competitiveness and Productivity represents a whole-of-Government plan focusing on the domestic drivers of competitiveness. Sustaining strong ties with trading partners while diversifying export markets, as set out in the Action Plan on Market Diversification, will also help to bolster Ireland’s resilience to potential trade shocks.
Finally, we must also continue to build up our fiscal buffers to ensure that Government is in a strong position to respond to future shocks. In particular, as set out in the Medium-Term Fiscal Structural Plan, Government will keep saving for the future by running budgetary surpluses and setting money aside in the Future Ireland Fund and Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund.
420. Deputy William Aird asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the outcome of his recent visit to California in respect of Ireland’s economic and financial relationship with the State; the discussions held on investment, job creation and engagement with multinational employers; whether any commitments or opportunities for further inward investment or expansion in Ireland arose; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10106/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe aim of my visit to California last month was to enhance Ireland’s economic partnership with the United States, with a particular focus on companies and stakeholders based on the West Coast. I was pleased to have the opportunity to meet with a wide range of representatives from companies either based in Ireland, expanding in Ireland, or considering investment in Ireland.
Ireland and the U.S enjoy a significant and mutually beneficial economic relationship. Many US companies have long seen Ireland as their base within the EU, through our highly skilled workforce, geographic location, pro enterprise environment and commitment to innovate. Indeed, approximately 245,000 people in Ireland are employed by US-owned companies. California is a key part of this relationship, with its position as a global leader in innovation, healthcare, technology and venture capital.
My engagement with them reaffirms my commitment to fostering and developing innovation and technology and maintaining a pro-enterprise environment that is mutually beneficial to our two countries.
421. Deputy William Aird asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance how fiscal policy will move beyond once-off supports to permanently reduce cost-of-living pressures for low and middle-income households; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10107/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraGovernment has provided significant fiscal support to households and businesses over the last four years to help absorb the worst impact of rising prices. Previous Budgets had incorporated sizable once-off packages comprised of temporary measures in response to the high levels of inflation. This was a necessary – and economically justified – approach.
However, budgetary policy cannot be conducted on the basis of short-term, temporary measures indefinitely. As inflation has eased, we are moving away from multiple ‘fiscal events’ in a year and towards permanent and sustainable measures, targeted at the most vulnerable.
For example, in Budget 2026, in recognition of still-elevated energy prices, Government extended the reduced rate of gas and electricity for a longer period, providing greater clarity and certainty to households and businesses.
Analysis by my Department indicates that Budget 2026 was progressive: lower income households benefitted the most from the measures introduced, with gains in the bottom two cohorts of 4.9 per cent and 3.8 per cent, respectively.
423. Deputy William Aird asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will consider broadening the scope of professions included in the guidelines for flat-rate expenses for self-supplied uniforms; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10109/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraRevenue have advised that the flat rate expense (“FRE”) regime is operated by them on an administrative basis, where both a specific commonality of expenditure exists across an employment category and the statutory requirement for the tax deduction as set out in section 114 of the Taxes Consolidation Act (“TCA”) 1997 is satisfied, namely, that the expenses are wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred in the performance of the duties of the office or employment by the employee concerned and that such expenses are not reimbursed by his or her employer.
The FRE regime was established to apply a uniformity of approach to tax deductibility for expenses of large groups of employees and to facilitate ease of administration for both Revenue and employees. The expense should apply to all employees in that category and not be discretionary.
The FRE regime developed incrementally over the last 40 to 50 years and was established at a time when the numbers of employees/PAYE taxpayers filing an Income Tax Return was relatively low. This contrasts with the position today, whereby due to significant IT developments in Revenue systems in recent years, as well as the promotion of online channels, Revenue is now providing an easy to use, free, on-line Income Tax Return filing solution for taxpayers. For example, the number of PAYE taxpayers that filed an Income Tax Return for the 2023 tax year was over 1,100,000, when compared to the figure of under 300,000 in 2018.
Revenue have further advised that the FRE is generally determined following engagement between Revenue and the relevant representative body. Notwithstanding that an FRE is not available to a particular group, as for all employees, they retain their statutory right to claim a deduction under section 114 TCA 1997 in respect of actual vouched expenses incurred wholly, exclusively and necessarily in the performance of the duties of their employment, to the extent to which the expenses are not reimbursed by the employer.
If there is no FRE available for an employment category and the employee has incurred qualifying employment related expenses that have not been reimbursed by his or her employer, the amount incurred can be claimed by logging into the my Account facility on the Revenue website. A uniform bearing an employer logo or of a style that is identifiable as a uniform, which employees are obliged to supply, and wear will generally meet the conditions for claiming a deduction.
Further information in regard to the general rule as to deduction of expenses in employment for expenses and making a claim for such expenses is contained in Tax and Duty Manual Part 05-02-20: www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/income-tax-capital-gains-tax-corporation-tax/part-05/05-02-20.pdf.
424. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question Nos. 397–403 of 27 January 2026, to clarify whether Section 851A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 prevents the Revenue Commissioners from providing aggregated and anonymised statistical information (details supplied): and, if such information cannot be provided, to identify the specific statutory provision relied upon to withhold each category of aggregate data; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10140/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra425. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance whether any estimate, internal model or fiscal impact analysis was prepared by the Revenue Commissioners or his Department regarding the cost to the Exchequer of limiting Karshan-related liabilities to the years 2024–2025, instead of applying the Supreme Court judgment retrospectively; if no such estimate was prepared, to explain if the Government considered that this limitation confers a selective fiscal advantage on participating employers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10141/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra426. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question Nos. 399–404 of 27 January 2026, whether the Revenue Commissioners obtained any written legal advice of any kind (including internal Revenue legal advice, advice from external counsel or advice from any departmental legal unit) specifically addressing: the compatibility of the Karshan Disclosure Opportunity with Articles 107 and 108 TFEU (on State aid); the obligation of prior notification under Article 108(3) TFEU; the principle of sincere cooperation under Article 4(3) TEU; to publish any such advice or if none exists, to confirm explicitly that no written legal advice addressing these EU-law issues was obtained prior to the implementation of the Karshan Disclosure Opportunity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10142/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 424, 425 and 426 together.
I am advised that Revenue is currently collating and reviewing submissions received from employers under the Karshan settlement opportunity up to Friday, 30 January 2026, to assess compliance with the terms set out in the relevant Tax and Duty Manual.
This work is ongoing and, in due course, Revenue will publish aggregated statistics, in compliance with section 851A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997.
The Supreme Court judgment in Karshan, delivered in late 2023, provided important clarity on the classification of workers for tax purposes by setting out a structured framework for determining employment status. Revenue designed the Karshan settlement opportunity to support compliance with that clarified framework from 2024 onwards, rather than to retrospectively revisit classifications made in good faith. Therefore, I am advised that there was no requirement- to develop an estimate, internal model or fiscal impact analysis in respect of the Exchequer cost of applying the Karshan judgment for the years 2024–2025, rather than retrospectively.
The Karshan settlement opportunity does not confer a selective fiscal advantage as it was made available to all employers in the State subject to appropriate limitations. The opportunity did not extend to situations where the individual should already have been treated as an employee under the Code of Practice on Determining Employment Status in force prior to October 2023, or where employee status had already been established through a published decision or determination of the Department of Social Protection, the Workplace Relations Commission, the Tax Appeals Commission, or a court.
Section 849 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides the Revenue Commissioners extensive Care and Management provisions in relation to the administration of the tax system. Disclosure opportunities have been a feature of the Irish tax system and also a common feature of other self-assessment tax regimes in other Member States and in other countries. They are generally designed as widely available. Disclosure opportunities are seen as best practice at EU and OECD level by securing short and long term tax compliance in a cost effective way. Revenue advises me that the Karshan Disclosure opportunity is compatible with Irish and EU law and is fully within its legal authority. Revenue does not disclose matters relating to legal advice.
427. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance to provide details of all active interdepartmental, interagency, and department-agency working groups organised under his remit. [10154/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI wish to advise the Deputy that my Department has responsibility for a number of groups under its remit including:
The Climate Economy Group
The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism Steering Group
The Standard Fund Threshold Implementation Group
The Housing Investment and Policy Impact Working Group
Ireland Sovereign Green Bonds Working Group
National Financial Literacy Strategy Steering Group
Mortgage Arrears Forum
Inter-departmental Group on the Multiannual Financial Framework
Interdepartmental Group on Anti-Fraud
Anti-Money Laundering Steering Committee
AML - National Risk Assessment Subgroup
AML - Self Regulating Bodies Subgroup
AML - Statistics Subgroup
Cross Departmental Working Group on transposition of 6AMLD.
Officials in my Department also participate in a number of other interdepartmental, interagency and department-agency groups, several Cabinet Committees established/chaired by other Departments and lead or participate in a number of internal and external committees or work groups that facilitate formulation of wider policy perspectives and strategies in line with its role as a central Government Department.
428. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the amount of inheritance tax that has been paid by group a, group b and group c in each of the last ten years. [10194/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI am advised by Revenue that the revenue accrued on an annual basis from inheritance tax broken down by Group status in each of the years from 2011 to 2024 can be found in the link below: www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/documents/statistics/receipts/cat-receipts.pdf.
2025 data broken down by Group status is not currently available, however I note that provisional 2025 CAT receipts were approximately €1,121 million.
429. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the average value of businesses that have been inherited in each of the past ten years. [10195/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra430. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the average value of farms that have been inherited in each of the past ten years. [10196/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 429 and 430 together.
I am advised by Revenue that the average value of businesses that have been gifted or inherited in the last number of years is shown in the table below. Data for earlier years and 2025 is not readily available.
|
Year |
Gifts (€M) |
Inheritances (€M) |
|
2020 |
1.68 |
0.48 |
|
2021 |
1.06 |
0.5 |
|
2022 |
1.04 |
0.99 |
|
2023 |
1.07 |
1.25 |
|
2024 |
2.72 |
1.17 |
Furthermore, I am advised that the average value of farms (agricultural relief) that have been gifted or inherited in the last number of years is shown in the Table below. Data for earlier years and 2025 is not readily available.
|
Year |
Gifts (€M) |
Inheritances (€M) |
|
2020 |
0.56 |
0.45 |
|
2021 |
0.58 |
0.48 |
|
2022 |
0.64 |
0.51 |
|
2023 |
0.66 |
0.57 |
|
2024 |
0.64 |
0.61 |
432. Deputy John Connolly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will provide an update on the development of the roadmap referenced in Budget 2026 concerning the simplification and adaptation of the tax framework for retail investment (details supplied); the progress made to date in preparing this roadmap; whether engagement has taken place with stakeholders or with the European Commission regarding its recommendation on savings and investment accounts; and the expected timeline for its publication early in 2026, as indicated in his written response of 4 November 2025. [10290/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the Deputy is aware, as well as reducing the rate of taxation that applies to Irish and equivalent offshore funds and Irish and certain foreign life assurance products, Budget 2026 included a commitment to publish a roadmap on the taxation of retail investment.
The roadmap will set out an approach to simplify and adapt the tax framework to further support retail investment while retaining necessary and important anti-avoidance protections in a proportionate manner.? Work is underway to prepare the roadmap, including consideration of the Funds Sector 2030 Report ?the European Commission’s recommendation on savings and investment?accounts. I look forward to receiving proposals shortly and I expect the roadmap to be published in the coming months.
I would note that detailed consideration is necessary to ensure that any changes in this area achieve an appropriate balance between supporting retail investment and maintaining appropriate anti-avoidance protections. However, the Government is very clear that retail investment needs to be encouraged, as set out in the Programme for Government, and in line with the work underway on Savings and Investment Union at the EU level.
In terms of engagement on the issue of the European Commission recommendation, the issue of savings and investment accounts has been raised with my Department by a range of stakeholders as part of the usual ongoing communication and engagement. My Department is also engaging directly with the Commission on this important aspect of Savings and Investment Union.
433. Deputy Paula Butterly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance to outline whether persons affected by changes in the methods of enforcement and/or taxation of a State pension while in receipt of an additional occupational pension were informed of these changes in advance; the degree to which these communications were issued; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10330/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI note the Deputy's question on changes to the tax treatment of the State pension for individuals in receipt of an additional occupational pension.
The State Pension (Contributory) is a taxable source of income, as provided for in Section 126 of the Taxes Consolidation Act (TCA) 1997, and while it is paid gross to the recipient, it is liable to Income Tax although it is not subject to the Universal Social Charge (USC) or Pay Related Social Insurance (PRSI).
Revenue and the DSP have a long-standing data-sharing arrangement between both organisations which facilitates the operation of both the tax and welfare systems. Data has been shared over a number of years in relation to taxable welfare payments - such as pensions and long-term benefit payments, which allows tax to be deducted throughout the tax year instead of creating a full year’s tax bill at the end of the year.
Where a person in receipt of payments from DSP also has an additional source of employment or occupational pension income, the mechanism used to collect tax due is by reducing the person’s annual tax credits and rate band, by the annual amount of their DSP income. This ensures that the DSP payment is paid gross to the recipient, while the salary or pension, as paid by their employer, will have any tax due on both the DSP income and the employment deducted from it.
A change was made from the beginning of 2025 to how Revenue collects tax due from certain individuals in receipt of income from the DSP. This change affected customers who are registered with an employer/pension provider, receive income from DSP, and are also a chargeable person in receipt of additional income not taxed via PAYE. Such persons would be obliged to file an annual Form 11 to return their income, including income from DSP.
This change allowed such taxpayers to pay the correct amount of tax in the year the income was earned from 2025 onwards, as Revenue reduced annual tax credits and rate band on Tax Credit Certificates (TCC) to take account of any taxable income from DSP. This aligned with the current method for those earning PAYE income who are also in receipt of income from DSP.
This change was made for all such customers, with the exception of those who sought to defer this change until the beginning of 2026. On request, a deferral was granted to the reduction of taxpayers' tax credits and rate band until 01/01/2026. This deferral opportunity ended in 2025 and these taxpayers will have received a revised Tax Credit Certificate (TCC) valid from 01/01/2026 to reflect the taxation of their taxable income from DSP. All customers who were granted a deferral were written to last year to advise them of this change.
When completing the 2025 Form 11, a taxpayer's DSP income will be automatically pre-populated on the return (on a table for their review and inclusion on the Form 11). As usual, taxpayers need to declare all income sources on the Form 11.
Revenue has informed me that a Tax Credit Certificate issues to all individuals in receipt of PAYE income (employment or occupational pension) outlining the allocations of their tax credit and rate band entitlements. If an individual is also in receipt of the State Pension (Contributory) from the Department of Social Protection (DSP), this income is also included on his or her Tax Credit Certificate.
434. Deputy Shay Brennan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance whether his Department has considered the interaction between U.S. federal estate tax and Irish capital acquisitions tax where Irish residents hold U.S. situs assets. [10348/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra435. Deputy Shay Brennan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance whether his Department is satisfied that current unilateral relief under Section 107 of the Capital Acquisitions Tax Consolidation Act 2003 adequately protects the Irish tax base, given that U.S. estate tax rates commonly exceed Irish CAT rates, thereby frequently reducing the Irish CAT yield on such assets to nil. [10349/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra436. Deputy Shay Brennan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance whether his Department has examined the feasibility and fiscal impact of introducing a narrowly targeted CGT-neutral restructuring mechanism to allow Irish residents to transfer direct U.S. situs securities into Irish or EU regulated funds without triggering immediate capital gains tax, subject to anti-abuse safeguards. [10350/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 434, 435 and 436 together.
Broadly speaking, an inheritance is chargeable to Capital Acquisitions Tax (CAT) in Ireland where:
• the deceased person was resident or ordinarily resident in the State at the date of the disposition,
• the beneficiary was resident or ordinarily resident in the state at the date of the inheritance, or
• the property was situated in the State at the date of the inheritance.
CAT is payable by the beneficiary of the inheritance at the rate of 33%, to the extent that its taxable value, when aggregated with previous gifts or inheritances taken since 5 December 1991 from within the same Group, exceeds the applicable Group threshold. There are currently three Group thresholds:
• the Group A threshold (currently €400,000) applies, inter alia, where the beneficiary is a child (including certain foster children) of the disponer;
• the Group B threshold (currently €40,000) applies where the beneficiary is a brother, sister, nephew, niece or lineal ancestor or lineal descendant of the disponer;
• the Group C threshold (currently €20,000) applies in all other cases.
My understanding is that the United States (US) imposes Federal Estate Tax (FET) at rates of up to 40% on the transfer of the worldwide taxable estate of any deceased person who was a US citizen or resident at the date of death. Where the deceased person was not a US citizen or US resident (e.g., was Irish tax resident) only US situate assets are taxed. The FET was first enacted in 1916, and significant changes have been made to it over time. One of the areas where the FET has changed considerably is the level of the “Basic Exclusion Amount” which is effectively the value of an estate that is not subject to tax. Initially set at $50,000, it is currently $15,000,000. However, a significantly more limited threshold of $60,000 applies where the deceased person was not domiciled in the U.S. or a US citizen at the date of death.
Accordingly, where an Irish tax resident individual dies having held US situate assets, both CAT and FET may arise in respect of those assets. However, relief from double taxation may be available under the Convention between Ireland and the US with respect to taxes on estates of deceased persons, or under section 107 of the Capital Acquisitions Tax Consolidation Act (CATCA) 2003 which provides for unilateral relief for any “foreign tax” of a similar character to CAT arising on property situated outside the State.
The Convention between Ireland and the US was entered into in 1949 and given legal effect by Finance Act 1950. It applies to CAT on inheritances in Ireland and FET in the US. It does not apply to CAT on gifts in Ireland, or to estate or inheritance tax imposed by individual states in the US. Article III(2) of the Convention provides a situs code for the purposes of the Convention. Where the situs code applies, the following categories of assets are deemed to have been Irish situate if the individual was domiciled in Ireland at the date of his or her death, and therefore outside the scope of FET:
• debts due to the deceased, e.g., bank accounts;
• moneys payable under an assurance policy or an insurance policy on the life of the deceased person;
• government securities and shares or stock in municipal or government corporations.
Where the Convention does not apply, relief from double taxation may be available under section 107 CATCA 2003. Such relief would operate by reducing the amount of CAT that is payable on the inheritance by the amount of FET that was paid in respect of the same assets. In circumstances where the amount of FET paid either equals or exceeds the amount of CAT that is payable, then this would result in no CAT being payable on the inheritance in Ireland.
Tax treaties allow for the smooth and regulated taxation of international business and investment activities. Ireland’s longstanding tax treaty policy has been to expand, maintain, and enhance its network to remove barriers and facilitate trade and investment opportunities between Ireland and partner jurisdictions. They provide greater certainty and fairness for taxpayers regarding their tax obligations in foreign jurisdictions and are key to the prevention of double taxation.
In relation to your capital gains tax (CGT) question, I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that section 29 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (TCA 1997) provides for the scope of Irish CGT. The proposal outlined in the Deputy’s query is made in the context of Irish residents. Section 29(2) TCA 1997 provides that, subject to any statutory exceptions, Irish tax resident persons are chargeable to CGT in respect of gains accruing to them on the disposal of assets, wherever located. As such, should an Irish tax resident person dispose of securities located in the U.S., such persons are chargeable to CGT in respect of any gains accruing to them on foot of this disposal, subject to any exemptions or reliefs that may apply in the specific circumstances of the disposal.
The Deputy’s proposal relates to the transfer of U.S. located securities into Irish or E.U. regulated funds. Irish regulated investment funds are taxed under the ‘gross-roll up’ regime. Under this regime, a ‘gross roll-up’ applies such that there is no annual tax on income or gains arising to a fund. Instead, exit tax arises in respect of payments made to certain unit holders in that fund or on the sale of units by those unit holders. To prevent indefinite or long-term deferral of this exit tax, a disposal is deemed to occur every 8 years. The taxable gain arising on the 8-year deemed disposal (the chargeable event) is the value of the units at the time less the amount invested. Exit tax applies at a rate of 38% (with effect from 1 January 2026) in respect of Irish resident individual investors (unless the fund is a Personal Portfolio Investment Undertaking in which case tax at 60% applies), and 25% in respect of Irish resident corporate investors. For individual investors, USC does not apply and PRSI may apply. Where the units in an Irish regulated investment fund are bought and sold on a stock market (i.e. quoted) and cleared through a recognised clearing system, such as an Exchange Traded Fund, the investor must account for the tax through the self-assessment system.
In the case of regulated funds located in other EU/EEA countries, as such funds are subject to the same regulation as Irish funds, the tax treatment of an investment in such a fund is similar to that which applies in respect of an investment made in an Irish domiciled regulated fund. Investments in funds located in other OECD member states, where the fund is substantially similar to an Irish fund, are also taxed on a similar basis to investments in Irish funds. Irish investors are required to account for the tax through the self-assessment system at the rate of 38% for individuals (with effect from 1 January 2026) and 25% in respect of Irish corporate investors.
437. Deputy Peter 'Chap' Cleere asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance his views on the appropriateness of the €100,000 limit on savings applicable to the credit union sector as outlined in regulation 35 of SI 1 of 2016 as amended; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10406/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraRegulation 35 of the Credit Union Act 1997 (Regulatory Requirements) Regulations 2016 prescribes an individual member’s savings limit of €100,000 on all credit unions. The Central Bank makes this, and all of its regulations, independent of Government.
The Central Bank undertook a review of the continued appropriateness of the savings cap in 2019. This was informed by financial data extracted from the quarterly prudential returns submitted by the credit unions to the Central Bank and responses to a questionnaire issued to all credit unions in February 2019. The review concluded that the €100,000 individual member’s savings limit remained appropriate.
The rationale outlined by the Registrar of Credit Unions (in their letter to previous Minister for Finance dated 29 July 2020, which is available on the Central Bank website) was that a maximum individual member’s savings limit of €100,000 helps to ensure the protection of members’ savings. It also ensures that credit unions’ funding continues to be sufficiently diversified and is not dependent on a small number of members.
The Central Bank also considered the potential negative financial stability impact on the sector in the event of any member losing a portion of their savings not covered by the Deposit Guarantee Scheme (which guarantees credit union deposits up to €100,000 per person).
As of 30 September 2025, the unaudited extract of data provided by the Central Bank confirms that the vast majority of credit union members hold savings below the €100,000 limit. The average amount of savings held in a credit union account is c. €5,000, with 97% of accounts holding savings of less than €30,000.
Furthermore, should a credit union wish to increase their individual member’s savings limit above this €100,000, they may do so by seeking approval in writing from the Central Bank under Regulation 37 of the Credit Union Act 1997 (Regulatory Requirements) Regulations 2016.
The Central Bank may grant approval for this request if the credit union has assets greater than €100 million and the Central Bank is satisfied that granting the approval is consistent with the protection of members' savings and proportionate with regard to the nature, scale and complexity of the credit union.
438. Deputy Johnny Guirke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance whether a cross-agency review involving Revenue is underway in relation to an employment model, corporate governance, and franchise practices (details supplied). [10761/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraRevenue is legally precluded, under section 851A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, from commenting on the tax affairs of or interactions with specific individuals, businesses or entities.
Revenue engages, as appropriate, with other relevant State bodies in the context of cross-agency compliance and oversight activities. In this regard, Revenue’s risk-profiling and assurance processes consider a range of factors, including employment models, corporate governance structures, and business or franchise arrangements, where these may give rise to potential compliance risks.
