Kathryn Reilly (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 10, line 12, to delete "sale;" and substitute the following:
"sale, net of the following:
(a) any outstanding liabilities on the mortgage of the relevant residential property,
(b) the total value of stamp duty paid following the purchase of the relevant residential property where it was bought on or after 2000,
(c) the value accruing to the relevant residential property arising from any adaptations to the property for the purposes of making it suitable for a person with a physical, sensory or intellectual disability or mental health difficulty to live in,
and where the relevant residential property is in negative equity, the chargeable value shall be the current market value of the relevant property on the valuation date less the value of the property at the time of purchase as expressed in the full value of the mortgage taken out at the time of purchase;?.

This amendment also seeks to add to the definition of chargeable value as discussed in the debate on amendment No. 4. Sinn Féin has a problem with the definition of the gross market value of the home. In basing the tax on the gross market value the Minister is failing to take account of a wide range of issues central to any true valuation in that regard. For example, account is not taken of the outstanding amount of the mortgage or negative equity or that in such cases the tax could be considered a tax on debt as opposed to tax on an asset.

Account is also not taken of any increase in the gross value of the home as a result of adaptations to make the property suitable for people with physical, sensory and intellectual disabilities or mental health difficulties. This amendment to the definition of chargeable value seeks to make calculation of the value of the family home a net value, taking into account some of the liabilities such as negative equity, adaptations to the house and so on as provided for in subsection (c). That a person would be punished because a member of his or her family is disabled, is morally wrong. Such adaptations are not a luxury, rather they are a necessity. It is unacceptable that such works would be taken into consideration in calculation of the value of the home. It is unfair that a family home will be levied on the basis of the gross value of the property, in particular if that property does not have a value.