Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

When he has funding to prevent flooding in people's houses, he should actually use it. I will deal with that matter specifically when I move my amendment on Committee Stage. I am not opposing the broad thrust of the legislation because we agree with the extension to 2019 that the Minister of State has included in it. However, we would not need to be here today if he or the Minister for Finance had accepted our amendments to the Finance Bill on exactly this point earlier in the year. This could have been done and dusted but the Government voted down our amendments at that time. I am pleased the Minister is doing a complete U-turn and is coming back to accepting the principle of the amendment we proposed regarding an extension of the revaluation date until 2019. I welcome that belated U-turn and his coming back to support a Fianna Fáil policy that was voted down by the Government earlier this year in the debate on the Finance Bill. The local property tax yield in 2014 was €491 million and the estimate for 2015 is approximately €440 million. Some of the reduction is probably due to the fact that a number of local authorities have reduced the rates in their areas. As we said, the valuation date is 2 May 2013. Most people assume it is being done in good faith. I am not aware of the number of cases in respect of which the Revenue Commissioners have followed up in this regard.

One issue that was mentioned by various people before is the valuation date of 2013. I am concerned that it might lead to a situation where people selling houses will be marketing them as pre-2013 and post-2013. Those that are pre-2013 will have their valuations fixed on that date, while the effective valuation date for those who were lucky enough to be able to purchase a new house post-2013 will be in 2016.

It is important to confirm that the valuation date being extended to 2019 relates to those who had a valuation date of 2013. For people who buy in 2016, the valuation will be fixed until 2019 but the second-hand house market is particularly important. If a house that was valued legitimately and properly in 2013 continues to be owned by the same person, that valuation will hold until 2019. However, if the semi-detached house in the other half of the same building is sold, the new owner will pay the property tax on the increased value. There will be two houses, side by side and part of one structure, but one will have a pre-2013 valuation and the other will have a valuation based on 2016 prices. There is an anomaly there which I will ask the Minister of State to address. Perhaps it can be dealt with, although it is not provided for in this legislation. I do not have a particular amendment on it but it is a point I would like the Minister of State to consider as the debate on the Bill proceeds.

We come to the issue of pyrite. I am a little scathing about the big play made of this and the page and a half of the Minister of State's script dealing with pyrite. We all agree that there should be an exemption for the people whose houses are affected by pyrite. The Minister of State's words indicate he agrees but his actions do not reflect that. I understand that, up to September, only 76 households were excused from local property tax as a result of problems with pyrite. The Minister of State, the Government and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government made a song and dance with regard to an exemption for pyrite and now we find that up to the end of September only 76 households received the benefit of that. It really is making a mountain out of a molehill in terms of publicity. We have a mountain of publicity but a molehill when it comes to the number of houses that are actually excluded from the local property tax.

More than 2,000 people have applied for the exemption. Just 5% of those who have applied for the exemption have been awarded it. The Minister of State will have to revisit this issue to ensure the cases of those who have applied are dealt with fairly, promptly and quickly. I suppose another consultants' report will have to be obtained to enable the Government to decide how best to proceed.

I would like to mention another issue pertaining to the recognition of houses that arises in the context of the local property tax. The Minister of State and I had this exact discussion in the House on 23 October last, when I initiated a Private Members' Bill only for it to be voted down by the Government. People who live in some apartments and managed estates are being taxed on the double for services because they are paying management fees and the full value of the local property tax. Some, although not all, of the services for which they are paying through their management fees should be provided by local authorities. I introduced the Management Fees (Local Property Tax) Relief Bill 2015 earlier this year to deal with this anomaly. I thank Senator Darragh O'Brien, who has championed this matter in the Dublin area and got the party to approve the legislation. I proposed the Bill in the Dail on his behalf, essentially because he was unable to introduce it in the Seanad due to the prohibition on tabling finance Bills in that House. I am sure he has subsequently discussed the legislation at length inside and outside the Seanad. I hope he has done so in his constituency and the other constituencies that are affected by this issue.

One of the amendments I intend to propose on Committee Stage today reflects the essence of the Management Fees (Local Property Tax) Relief Bill 2015. The Minister of State will note that the amendment proposes to amend the Finance (Local Property Tax) Act 2012 by including the following provision in it:

Where a liable person is obliged to pay an annual management fee in respect of a relevant residential property and said management fee is paid in full, then such person shall be exempt from having to pay part of his or her local property tax in a relevant year, the amount of that part being any of the following:(a) equal to one third of the management fee;

(b) €300; or

(c) equal to one third of the local property tax;whichever amount is lower.

I stress that this would apply where the management fee is paid in full. It would be a modest amount of money in each case. We went through the details of the costings of such a measure when we considered the Bill I proposed in October. It would cost €17 million. There are people who are paying on the double, in effect. Perhaps the Minister of State would give this proposal a second thought.

I genuinely agree with what has been said about people who have had their houses adapted for disability purposes. I also agree with what has been said about pyrite, although I would be happier if the Government did some of what it has said it is going to do. It needs to implement the proposal to give some people who have been affected by pyrite an exemption from the local property tax. There is still a list of exempted properties, including properties in unfinished estates. I think one of the categories accepted by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government for the purposes of exemption involves estates where there are no footpaths running up to the front doors of houses. Will the Minister of State agree today to my proposal that houses which have water running in their front doors and out their back doors and washing all and sundry in front of them - they may or may not have footpaths to their front doors - should be exempt from the local property tax? The houses that are being affected by the current flooding should have such an exemption. The Oireachtas should provide for that today. We will have an opportunity to make such provision as this Bill progresses. I think most people will agree that this proposal is fair and reasonable. I would also like to propose, even if it does not relate exactly to this Bill, that the Government should commission a report on the possibility of giving an exemption from commercial rates to businesses affected by flooding. Assistance of this nature should not be confined to people affected by flooding who have to pay local property tax on their houses.

I would like to make a further point about this matter as it applies to the question of commercial rates, which is relevant because legislation on it is being drawn up by the Department of Finance. Although the Minister of State will have the backing of this House when over the coming days he goes to places that have been affected by flooding, how will he be able to look at businesses that have been flooded while reminding the owners of those businesses to pay their commercial rates at the beginning of 2016? I suggest he needs to be in a position to say to those whose businesses have been destroyed that the Government understands that this is going to cost them a great deal of money, regardless of whether they have insurance cover. The Government needs to make it clear not only that it is showing empathy to people whose businesses have been destroyed by exempting them from commercial rates, but also that it is standing with householders whose houses have been flooded by relieving them of the requirement to pay the local property tax. I look forward to hearing the Minister of State's response to the issues I will be raising during the course of the debate on this Bill. I hope he accepts the principle that people who have been flooded out of it in recent times should not be asked by the Government to pay the local property tax in the first week of January 2016.

See this speech in context