Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 2 December 2021

Public Accounts Committee

Business of Committee

9:30 am

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do any other members wish to speak on this item? No. It is proposed that we note and publish the item and consider the responses. The next item is No. 901B from Mr. Niall Cody, chairman of the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, dated 18 November 2021, providing information requested by the committee regarding the disclosure of details of a settlement between Revenue and Perrigo. At our meeting of 18 November, we considered a related response, R0873, from the Tax Appeals Commission. We discussed this matter with Revenue during today's engagement and that debate is on the public record. It is proposed that we note and publish this item. Is that agreed? Agreed. The item has was flagged by me and Deputy Catherine Murphy. I do not think Deputy Murphy is with us. We dealt with No. 901B earlier and we are no clearer on it because of the issue regarding Revenue and confidentiality. That is understandable. Time did not allow us to go any further into the issue earlier. The tax demand was for €1.636 billion. That was subsequently reduced following a number of interventions. The case came before a court. The final figure was that Perrigo is due to pay Revenue is €266 million. I propose to the committee that we write to Revenue Commissioners following today's meeting. We must recognise the fact that there has to be client confidentiality, but in the general scheme of things, the issue at stake here would appear to be whether it was treated as a capital transfer incurring a rate of tax of 33%, or one of 12.5%, as part of its normal trading profits. I suggest we write to Revenue and seek an answer to that question. Surely, it is a matter of how a company, and particularly, a very large one, is treated for tax, and specifically, whether it is paying the 33% or the 12.5%. If it is 12.5%, we should seek an explanation, because even at 12.5% the figure would be more than double what it came in, namely, €266 million. A tax rate of 12.5% would have given rise to a demand of possibly between €600 million and €700 million. If it is agreed by the committee, I will ask the clerk to follow up with that information from Revenue. While recognising the fact that it is bound by confidentiality around these matters, perhaps more light can be shed on that. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next item is No. 903B from Mr. Derek Tierney, head of health infrastructure, Department of Health, dated 18 November 2021, and is a response to our request for information in relation to the analysis undertaken by the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board on the progress on the national children’s hospital. The progress report has been with the Department of Health for some time, and we have made a number of requests for sight of the report and information on the projected costs and completion date for the hospital. The Department's position remains that:

the Department and the Development Board have a responsibility to ensure the successful completion of this critical project and that any discussion of costs, however hypothetical or otherwise, at this time, would prejudice enforcement of the existing contract, and very likely negatively impact or jeopardise the Development Board in its ongoing engagement with the main contractor, and the Board's responsibilities for the timely completion of this critical project.

Our invitation to the Department of Health to our meeting on 16 December, which is two weeks from today, includes this matter as an agenda item. Also on the agenda for that meeting is the value for money review of the nursing homes support scheme, or fair deal scheme. As detailed in our January report on our examination of the Comptroller and Auditor General's special report on the scheme, the review was initiated by the Department of Health in March 2018 and was due for publication in March 2019. More than two and a half years later this item of correspondence states that a response on that matter will follow without specifying when. I do not think committee members will be happy with that. We recommended that the Department provide the committee with updates, but these have not been forthcoming. That is most disappointing. It is proposed that we note and publish the item. Is that agreed? Agreed. The item has been flagged by me and Deputy Catherine Murphy. Do any members want to speak on the item?