Seanad debates

Tuesday, 19 July 2011

Finance (No. 3) Bill: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Michael NoonanMichael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)

My position is that Senator Zappone has made a cogent argument and identified an issue which requires examination. I am not 100% sure whether she is absolutely correct in law but it appears that if married couples can go to their solicitor and obtain a non-judicial separation by agreement and receive certain tax benefits from such an arrangement, the same should apply to persons who are separated and have been in a legal civil partnership. Two issues run from this. There is the principal issue of parity, which is the one I would like to deal with and should be dealt with as soon as we can properly do so, having received the best of advice, and the issue of whether any practical implication arises from this for any separated couple who were in a civil partnership. As yet, this does not appear to be the case although such practical implications may arise in future.

In terms of dealing with the particular problem of individuals we do not have to proceed in haste because we are not correcting anything in the lives of citizens. However, in terms of parity we obviously want everything that was in the primary legislation to be reflected in the consequential tax legislation. There is considerable merit in the arguments made by Senator Zappone and while I am not 100% sure whether she is fully correct, the matter requires further examination by the Office of the Attorney General. If her office concludes that Senator Zappone has identified a provision that makes persons in civil partnerships who separate different in tax law from married couples, I will move to amend the provision in the finance Bill. The finance Bill is a natural consequence of the budget. It will be published next February and will be enacted in the following five or six weeks. If there were a practical example of people suffering consequences as a result of this measure we could think of moving sooner, but I am not 100% certain whether the arguments are fully correct. It seems that they are. There is certainly sufficient merit in the Senator's argument for me to instruct the Attorney General to examine it and to reference it to the other relevant Departments. I will proceed on that basis if that is acceptable.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.