Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)

The Minister accepts we will have to evolve this and my amendment allows him to make regulations. I did not have time to amend this provision but the Minister said, rightly, the House would like to see this placed by substantive resolution. If he was disposed to accept this amendment, he would make amendments by way of substantive motion before the House. There is a need to address this.

There are flaws in this for businesses also. They require capital allowances against investments legitimately made in their businesses. Our whole tax code has been built around the idea that one is allowed to invest in one's business to maintain and develop it and that should be recognised in the tax code. However, this levy does not allow that to happen.

I know the Minister has been in discussions but some features of the way this interacts have had unintended consequences - at least I imagine they are unintended. I understand that in the pension investment industry, some of the ways in which this will apply will give rise to significant distortions as between different products and different providers of products.

There seems to be scope to learn and to modify. While we may await the Finance Bill from year to year, there is a need for us to be able to identify those defects and to respond. I am disappointed we are not beginning to see ways from the Minister's Department and advisers.

The Minister has dramatically increased his dependence on this form of taxation between the two budgets. It has been signalled that he will raise another €2.5 billion in taxes in next year's budget.

See this speech in context