Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Doherty for his contribution. I have conducted a review of the SARP scheme. As he will be aware, I have put in place a cap of €1 million for new applicants, which will apply to all applicants from 1 January 2020. I have put in place such a cap driven by my own concerns to ensure we have the right balance between schemes that reward people on a high income and the benefits those individuals bring to the rest of our economy.

I will say a word about those on high incomes and then a word about the benefits that are brought to the rest of our economy. On a number of occasions, the Deputy made reference to the fact that somebody on €1 million would have a reduction in income tax that is payable of €111,000. This is the figure supplied to me by the Revenue Commissioners. What the Deputy did not go on to acknowledge is the other part of the equation, which is that the individual on €1 million would pay income tax and USC of €355,511. The Deputy is correct that he or she would pay less tax but he or she would still pay an effective tax rate on €1 million of 35.55%. I have introduced the cap of €1 million for new applicants and all applicants from 1 January 2020 precisely to address the concerns I had regarding the benefit that could be made available to some, particularly those on a high income.

I will now deal with the broader rationale for the scheme because it is not to deliver benefits to those already well paid and, in some cases, very well paid. The rationale for the scheme is that it provides one of the tools we need to ensure Ireland is able to get a particular form of investment from particular companies located in Ireland. If I look at what those benefits are, the report I commissioned last year and made publicly available drove the Report Stage amendment on which I just commented.

Last year the companies in which these individuals work employed over 155,000 individuals and paid over €1.9 billion in PAYE taxes and over €2.5 million in corporation tax. They are the wider benefits the scheme has been put in place to address. The cold reality I face is that the scheme has to stand up against the fact that other countries in Europe have even more favourable schemes, the purpose of which is to attract individuals and then the companies which are located and providing employment in Ireland. Concrete examples are France, the Netherlands, Italy, Portugal and Malta where there is a similar scheme in place. The scheme in place in France offers a deduction of between 30% and 50% of total income. Under the Dutch scheme there is a minimum salary threshold of €37,000 and it provides the employee with a 30% tax-free allowance. The Portuguese scheme for qualified non-resident professionals offers a 30% reduction in the income tax rate. Many other open economies, small and large, have schemes such as this in place. The reason we have ours is to attract individuals who other companies are looking to attract in order that they will be located in Ireland in order to provide the tax revenue that will allow us to make progress in dealing with the issues that really matter to citizens and society.

The Deputy made reference to a personal experience with autism services. In my constituency I have had a lot of experience of the effect access to autism services can have on citizens. The sum of €2 million is provided to draw up an autism strategy. We are spending significant amounts of taxpayers' money to ensure we will have the supports and public services needed for families and, in particular, young boys and girls with autism. To do this, we need tax revenue. This is part of what we do to allow us to be competitive against other countries which have similar or more lucrative schemes to ours.