Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 109: To ask the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the criticism of the Revenue Commissioners by the Irish Taxation Institute; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4150/07]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I assume the Deputy is referring to the presentation by the Irish Taxation Institute, ITI, to the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service on 17 January on the under-claiming of allowances and reliefs by PAYE taxpayers.

I understand the ITI, in its presentation, suggested the introduction of a "one claim, one form" approach for securing tax reliefs. This would be a retrograde step because, under the current system, no forms are required for claiming most PAYE tax credits. Revenue operates a self-assessment ethic and assumes that people are honest. For example, the majority of claims to amend tax credit certificates are made over the telephone, via Revenue's lo-call 1890 service.

Forms are required in some instances, for example, medical expenses relief. Where Revenue requires a form to back up a claim, it generally prompts the claimant to complete the form every year. For example, anyone who claimed medical expenses relief in excess of €1,000 will receive a claim form in the post every year. This also applies in the cases of elderly persons who claim deposit interest retention tax, DIRT, relief. As announced in the recent budget, Revenue is working with the credit institutions to establish a system which would allow the elderly and incapacitated persons to obtain interest free of DIRT from 2007 onwards.

Revenue's philosophy regarding PAYE credits is, wherever possible, that taxpayers who claim once will keep a credit forever. This approach works well for standard credits with fixed amounts. Any suitable credit, once allowed, is generally carried forward from year to year by the Revenue computer system. In addition, many of the more significant reliefs have been made virtually automatic, either through the introduction of tax relief at source, TRS, or the automatic carry forward of the reliefs. For example, mortgage interest relief and medical insurance relief are provided at source through the taxpayer obtaining a reduction in repayments or premiums equivalent to the tax relief. Once claimed, recurring reliefs such as those for trade union subscriptions are allowed on an ongoing basis and reappear each year in the taxpayer's certificate of tax credits.

The ITI also implied that when claims are made refunds are not made in a timely manner. This is not the case and I am assured by Revenue that repayment claims are prioritised and Revenue's published customer service standards for the processing of refund claims are generally met, save in peak periods.

The ITI also urged Revenue to educate PAYE taxpayers about the tax system and their entitlements. I assure the Deputy that Revenue has taken this task seriously for many years. Each year, every PAYE taxpayer receives a tax credit certificate showing the credits he or she has been given. He or she also receives a short leaflet explaining all the standard credits available. It is relatively simple to check the credits given against those available and taxpayers are encouraged to do this. Credit certificates for 2007 are being issued and a press and radio advertising campaign is being built around this process.

From time to time, Revenue has public information campaigns. In 2006, its chairman wrote to every person on the PAYE tax record informing them about the new Revenue on-line service, ROS, and other self-service options for employees. In August and September 2006, Revenue launched an intensive nationwide campaign to encourage take-up of health type reliefs, the waste charge credit and rent relief. The response was encouraging and I am advised that Revenue will run a similar campaign this year.

A wide range of publicity booklets can be found in Revenue public offices and on its website. Leaflets and claim forms for medical and dental expenses are available in clinics, surgeries and pharmacies. More limited information is available on Teletext and, increasingly, Revenue information for the public is being made available in a wide variety of other languages, including Polish, Lithuanian and two Chinese dialects.

All these factors demonstrate that Revenue has long been proactive in its approach to dealing with claims for tax credits and reliefs. I am satisfied that taxpayers are being offered every assistance and advice in relation to claiming reliefs and credits and, together with the variety of service channels Revenue has put in place, they are being given the opportunity to do this in the most efficient and customer friendly way possible.

Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for his reply. The criticisms made by the Irish Taxation Institute have a number of worrying dimensions which militate against the view that Revenue is improving its performance. For this reason, it is important to carefully examine the institute's concerns. The Minister adverted to its concern that a high proportion of those entitled to certain reliefs, including medical expenses, trade union subscriptions and nursing home expenses, do not claim them. In other words, Revenue is retaining moneys which do not rightfully belong to it.

The ITI also found a high level of dissatisfaction among professionals — more than 50% — with the refund service. They found high levels of dissatisfaction that the Revenue is not handling complaints satisfactorily. Those are three serious findings. Although the Minister has refused to do so in the past, I ask him once again to arrange for the Revenue Commissioners to undertake a properly based estimate of how much in tax allowances is not making its way to taxpayers. Information is power and the Revenue Commissioners have available to them all the returns of medical practitioners, nursing homes, trade unions and others. They know these values and could easily calculate the extent to which under-claiming occurs. That is the key to making a change. If the Revenue once recognised the scale of the problem, one would see a huge amount of change following from that, both in Revenue's willingness to deal with refunds and other complaints. That is the linchpin of change. I ask the Minister to reconsider his previous decision not to have the Revenue Commissioners undertake such a study.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the Deputy's request, I will reconsider that matter. The Revenue Commissioners' plan for the development of PAYE through their operations policy and evaluation division is managed by an assistant secretary and contains two substantial units which monitor daily performance of the PAYE system. It plans future improvements and provides a wide range of information leaflets and guides aimed at employers and workers using PAYE. In this context, setting up a new PAYE customer satisfaction unit would be wasteful duplication. The Deputy is obviously not aware of the large number of Revenue staff in place serving PAYE taxpayers. The latest figures available show there is a total of over 1,880 working in customer service areas. Of those, close to 800 are dedicated solely to the PAYE sector. That represents core numbers engaged in customer service duties for PAYE customers. At peak periods, however, temporary staff are recruited and existing staff are moved between functions to alleviate backlogs and speed up response times.

As regards customer satisfaction, I refer the Deputy to a Civil Service-wide survey conducted on behalf of the Department of the Taoiseach in March last year. It found that 78% of general public customers and 81% of business customers said they were "very" or "fairly satisfied" with the level of service provided. Since Revenue is such a significant point of contact for so many Civil Service customers, it is also gratifying for them and indicates a higher level of satisfaction with the staff and the standard of service being provided by that office than the Institute of Taxation's survey might suggest.

As has been said, however, this has been a constructive contribution to the debate and the interactive relationship between these bodies is good. From my discussions with the Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, which are reasonably regular as one would expect, I know he is focussed on ensuring that customer satisfaction is high and that people are happy with the level of service provided. There is a growing level of responsibility on Revenue, so staff pressures come into play as well, but we have been able to assist in that regard in recent times. The Chairman is not averse to trying to see what other improvements could be introduced in addition to what is already being done. In fairness, initiatives as reflected in the Finance Bill confirm there is a co-operative approach from Revenue in trying to assist in terms of consumer satisfaction.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On behalf of the Labour Party, I have proposed the creation of a taxpayers' advocate. Notwithstanding the improvements which the Opposition has forced on the Revenue Commissioners in recent years to be more accountable to hard-working taxpayers, progress has been slow. It is a well established fact that every year some €200 million in tax refunds and rebates go uncollected by people in the PAYE sector and other taxpayers. Perhaps the Minister could update us with the figures. Recently, the Minister introduced a restriction of four years on ordinary PAYE taxpayers reclaiming rebates and refunds that may be due to them. Health expenses refunds are particularly bad in this regard. Young people may have influenza at this time of year and need to visit a doctor. They may not need to do so again until next November or December. They do not keep receipts, yet they are entitled to a tax refund for the minimum €50 it costs to go to a doctor in Dublin.

The Minister is arrogant to suggest that what the Revenue Commissioners have done, as a result of continuous pressure by the Opposition, is fantastic. Over Christmas, the Revenue Commissioners featured at some length in the Moriarty report. That report revealed that the Minister's late leader, Mr. Charles Haughey, could pick up the phone for two or three millionaires who had tax problems or were anxious to have a discussion about tax issues and, hey presto, the Chairman himself would get in touch with the affected millionaires.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should put a question.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hard-working taxpayers earning €34,000 pay tax on overtime at 41%. Very often, they get no tax refunds on medical expenses. A taxpayers' advocate is required who would put pressure on the Revenue Commissioners to give small taxpayers, who are not earning vast sums, their fair share. How many people get their refunds for bin charges? The estimate by the Institute of Taxation is up to 50%.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should put a question.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister give us his estimate? If 50% of people do not get their tax refund on bin charges, the Minister should give us his figures and tell us how good is the system.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Let us be clear about it, the responsibility for claiming credits lies with individual taxpayers. The Revenue Commissioners are making every effort to ensure people are aware of their rights so they can claim them.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not good enough.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The only arrogance that ever arises in this House at question time is when someone disagrees with the Deputy, so she calls them arrogant.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I represent taxpayers.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

So do I.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not represent millionaires, but the Minister does.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question No. 110.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My party represents far more working people than the Deputy's and that is why we have 81 seats.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should read the Moriarty report to see what the commissioner did for Mr. Haughey.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy looks at the Moriarty recommendations in that respect she would be more accurate in her comments. The Deputy has a blinkered view.