Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

On Committee Stage, the Minister rejected my suggestion that the practice of the Revenue Commissioners, which involves vigorously pursuing taxpayers who are suspected of making under-payments while quietly ignoring those who have apparent and suspected over-payments, is a one-way street. He defended the steps taken by the Revenue Commissioners to inform the public of its taxation responsibilities and entitlements to tax credits. He refused to accept that the complexities of this country's tax regime are baffling for many people and that the website and printed matter vehicles employed to inform people about such matters are inaccessible or couched in prohibitive language that is simply unintelligible for many citizens.

I support amendment No. 1 in the name of Deputy Burton and amendment No. 5 in the name of Deputy Paul McGrath. If the Minister continues to oppose the amendments, all we can do is to appeal directly to the Ombudsman and the Revenue Commissioners. One would not need a degree in English studies to put together a simple missive that would be sent to all taxpayers — the database is in place — asking the simple and salient questions in a very easily understood way. For instance, I suggest that the Revenue Commissioners prepare a circular, to be sent to all taxpayers subject to the PAYE code, asking a number of questions, including whether they have a mortgage, pay for health services, including GP, dental and orthodontic care, and third level education fees, and, if so, a prompt response could save one money.

People will appreciate the simplicity of such a document, with a series of questions in response to which one could tick a box indicating whether one falls into a particular category. That is not currently the practice, as I have confirmed since Committee Stage. We all receive missives from the Revenue Commissioners and they are not couched in simple terms. The office should state that if a taxpayer falls under any given category, such as those I have mentioned, he or she may be entitled to a refund of tax paid and a reduction in his or her future tax liability. By outlining in tabulated format the range of areas that would qualify for tax credits we would assist enormously in promoting a wider, more universal understanding of the working of the tax regime.

I do not know about other Deputies, but I do not receive as many queries on this matter as I do in respect of many other matters of concern in my constituency. That reflects that people just do not know the questions to ask. I have no doubt, however, that if a missive such as the one I suggest were sent to taxpayers, people would look for assistance in assessing whether it applied to them. I have no doubt that elected representatives, at Oireachtas and local authority levels, would be very happy to assist their fellow citizens in that regard. Of course, there are those who give professional advice but unfortunately the advice of the greater number of these professionals cannot be afforded by ordinary citizens, by and large, the people of whom I speak in the course of this debate.

There is good sense in both of the amendments. Their purpose is to try to ensure the more equitable and fair taxation practice, whereby people are entitled to tax credits, reductions in their liability and, in the case of many people, rebates of tax paid over years past. The Minister has a responsibly regarding this Bill to set in train what is necessary for the Revenue Commissioners to meet their responsibilities regarding the fairness we all wish to see in the tax regime in this State.

I commend both amendments to the Minister. I hope the offices of the Ombudsman and the Revenue Commissioners will take note of the contributions of Deputies right across the Opposition benches today and previously. In the event of the Minister not accepting the amendments, he should take on board the very sane and reasonable arguments presented and adopt them in practice.

See this speech in context