Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy McGrath. I know there was a debate about this on Committee Stage with my colleague, the Minister for Finance. Based on that, I do not propose to accept the amendment. As stated by the Minister on Committee Stage, section 114 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides for a tax deduction in respect of travel expenses that an employee or office holder is necessarily obliged to incur in the performance of the duties of their office or of their employment. This proposed section would mean in practice that an employee or office holder of a company may be reimbursed expenses of all travel and subsistence without any regard to the criteria set down in section 114, which I am sure is not the intention of the amendment.

It would also mean that the long-standing principle that return travel from home to work is not an allowable expense is not maintained. At present, where an employee or office holder incurs the expense of travelling from his or her normal place of work to attend a temporary place of work, those expenses will generally qualify for a tax deduction and an employer may pay or reimburse such expenses free of tax. The reason for this is that the individual is travelling from his or her normal place of work to another work location and is travelling in the performance of his or her duties.

I also remind the House, as Deputy McGrath has outlined, that officials in the Department of Finance continue to examine the submissions received in response to the recent consultation exercise on the tax treatment of expenses. Should any further legislative changes arise from that consultation exercise in respect of the taxation of expenses and should they be identified as necessary, the Minister will take the appropriate steps. In light of that body of work being carried out currently, on the basis of the consultation exercise and for the logistical reasons I have outlined, I do not propose to accept this amendment.

See this speech in context