Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

We will be dealing with them later, but we have proposed amendments, apropos some of the discussion we are having, to the effect that if even 1% of an investment is in Irish property, it should be subject to this tax and, we argue, more. The rate of withholding tax should be in the region of 90%, not 20%. The logic behind it is that there has been a really disastrous error on the part of the Government which encouraged speculation in property with the consequences it is belatedly and rather tokenistically trying to address with this amendment. Why should there be tax breaks or exemptions from capital gains tax other than active discouragement of speculation in property? Is the fact that the Government has had to bring forward this amendment not a belated acknowledgment of the disastrous mistake it made? Surely we should be trying to do absolutely everything to turn back the clock, to scotch completely and in every way possible the impact of speculation of a very conscious decision on the part of Government to inflate property values in order to get the banks back into business and NAMA to wash its face. Can the Minister of State tell me if that is the case? Was that the thinking behind it?

I remember when the issue of REITs first came up. I was a member of the finance committee when the various QIAIFs, ICAVs and so on were included in the Finance Bill. As a new Deputy, it was difficult to trawl through this stuff that really only a tax lawyer could understand. Frankly, anyone watching this will not have the foggiest notion what we are talking about. That was the problem in 2013. Were the REITs brought forward in 2013? The ICAVs were brought forward in 2014. In both cases I did not fully understand the details. In the case of the REITs, I was the first and only one to say it because no one even knew what they were. We had spent about ten hours talking about the Finance Bill. That was part of the problem. My head was fried and then the issue of the tax break for REIT's came up. I asked the Minister what they were. I asked: "What the hell is this?" It was a tax break for real estate investment and I cannot remember what the Minister said to justify it at the time. I think he used words to the effect that there would not be much money involved and not much tax would be forgone. I must look back at the transcript to see exactly what he said at the time. The country needs to know how much tax has been forgone as a result. Is there an acknowledgement on the part of Government that the introduction of these measures was an utterly disastrous mistake that led to the unbelievable escalation in property prices and rents and, as a consequence, an unprecedented homelessness crisis? Is the amendment not good enough because it is closing the door after the horse has bolted and when there is actually an opportunity to do something? We should try to grab as much of the profits from thee speculators as we possibly can before they make off with all of the money.

The Chairman did not interrupt anybody else.