Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We are dealing here with amendments Nos. 1 to 3, together, which relate to benefit in kind. The Minister will recall that I raised these issues on Committee Stage, particularly the issue of the BIK changes that took effect in the 2019 Finance Bill, which I supported. I do not think there was any opposition to those amendments at the time because this is about encouraging people and companies to make the transition so that their employees will benefit from a reduced BIK if they make the transition. Unfortunately, we are dealing with the cost-of-living crisis and as a result of that, with so many pressures bearing down on individuals and families, last year I called for the extension of the BIK for a period. The Minister’s predecessor, Deputy Donohoe, refused point-blank to listen to the calls and pleas from this side of the House and, indeed, from some backbenchers in the Minister’s party and in government. I welcome the fact that with the change in Minister for Finance, he has taken a more open approach to this and has brought forward this amendment, which will bring in a reduced BIK for the assessment year of 2023.

As I have mentioned to the Minister, in respect of the cliff edge, certain employees - it is not the businesses - who pick up this tab could have seen their liability increase by more than €1,000. For some, that cliff edge now is just beyond them. It is no longer the start of January but it could be the start of January next year. In a way, these employees are at the mercy of the companies that employ them. Will the companies change their fleet of cars and will they move away from the old fossil fuel engine to environmentally cleaner cars? That is the issue.

One of the biggest concerns I have, which I raised with the Minister on Committee Stage, is that we are completely in the dark. We have no data to tell us who has or has not moved, how many employees would be subject to this change when this measure runs out at the end of the year, or how to track progress in ascertaining whether this tax is affecting behaviour, which is what we are trying to do with this tax. The alternatives exist in companies where they are able to purchase their fleet. They are changing their fleet in anyway at a certain time and this measure is an incentive to do that.

The Minister said that he would engage further with Revenue to see whether that information can be obtained and that the details of these tax changes and their impact would be reviewed later in the year. Keeping this measure under review is the correct action. It may be a case that if this measure has not effected the change that we will need to extend it; it may be the case that perhaps a step is required. Instead of €10,000 being taken off the OMV, it may be €5,000, but that will still encourage people to make the change, but not with the significant step effect that is currently in place.

Amendments Nos. 1, 2 and 3 effectively provide that we are getting rid of the whole idea of trying to effect change in these companies through the tax measure. I do not believe that is the appropriate measure; it is appropriate for the Government to make the amendment it has up until the end of the year. Let us then collect the data from Revenue and see if it is possible to actually have a look at what is happening, assess that in the run-up to the 2024 budget, and to then make an informed decision as to whether the measure needs to be extended by step effect or, indeed, needs to just finish. That is very important.

As legislators, it is very difficult to be talking about tax changes where we want to effect change without being able to measure whether that is happening. The data should be available by the end of the summer, if that is possible.

See this speech in context