Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 97: To ask the Minister for Finance the cost to the Exchequer for reducing the top rate of tax by 1% and 2% and for reducing the bottom rate of tax by 1% and 2%; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34942/06]

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

By reference to the 2007 Pre Budget ready reckoner prepared by the Revenue Commissioners the full year costs to the Exchequer of reducing the top rate of income tax by one percentage point and two percentage points are estimated to be €228 million and €457 million, respectively. The costs of corresponding reductions in the standard rate of income tax are estimated at €512 million and €1,023 million respectively. These figures are provisional and subject to revision. The ready reckoner is available on my Department's website, at www.finance.gov.ie.

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

Question 98: To ask the Minister for Finance if there are proposals to amend Section 469 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 as sought by the Dyslexia Association of Ireland to allow the cost of specific tuition for dyslexia to qualify for tax relief under the heading of health expenses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34954/06]

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

The position is that expenses in respect of tuition for children with dyslexia do not qualify for health expenses tax relief and have never qualified for the relief since it was first introduced in 1967. I understand from the Revenue Commissioners, who deal with such claims, that individuals may have been under the impression that tuition for children with dyslexia was allowable under the heading of health expenses relief. I also understand that the Revenue Commissioners have written to the Dyslexia Association to clarify the matter.

In recent years, the Government has increased significantly the supports available through the direct expenditure system for children with disabilities, including those with dyslexia. As with many areas where State support may be required, the question arises as to whether such support may be more effectively provided through the direct expenditure route rather than through the tax system. One advantage of the former mechanism is that the support may be better targeted at those in need, irrespective of family income, whereas support through the tax system can only benefit those whose incomes are high enough to benefit from tax relief.

I have no plans to extend Section 469 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 to cover expenses incurred by parents who have children with dyslexia. However, this matter, like any other, can be raised by the Deputy at Finance Bill time.