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

Question 223: To ask the Minister for Finance the position in relation to the clawback provisions in respect of stamp duty; the number of occasions the clawback has been exercised; the number of properties in relation to same; the amount of stamp duty involved; the reason for the clawback being applied; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39964/06]

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

I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that between 4 April 2006 and 22 November 2006 there were 392 instances where various stamp duty reliefs which had been granted were clawed back. The total yield from the clawbacks amounted to €3,227,791. Generally each clawback referred to only one property.

The clawbacks were in respect of 4 reliefs as follows:

Young Trained Farmer relief, Section 81 of the Stamp Duties Consolidation Act 1999. There were 11 cases amounting to €63,946 clawed back. The relief is given to persons who at the date of execution of the deed have attained certain agricultural and educational standards or who subsequently attain such standards. This relief was clawed back as the lands or part of the lands the subject of the relief were disposed of within 5 years from the date of execution of the instrument without the proceeds from the disposal being used in acquiring other lands within a period of one year of the date of the disposal. The relief is in the form of a zero rate of stamp duty.

New dwelling-house/apartment with floor-area certificate, Section 91 of the Stamp Duties Consolidation Act 1999. There were 266 cases amounting to €2,351,348 clawed back. This relief is granted where the property has a floor area of less than 125 square metres, is occupied by the purchaser or by some person in right of the purchaser and is clawed back if the purchaser is in receipt of rent from the dwelling-house/apartment other than rent received under the rent-a-room scheme within 5 years of the date of execution of the deed. The relief is in the form of a zero rate of stamp duty.

New dwelling-house/apartment with no floor area certificate, Section 92 of the Stamp Duties Consolidation Act 1999. There were 43 cases amounting to €366,815 clawed back. The relief is granted where the property has a floor area of greater than 125 square metres, is occupied by the purchaser or by some person in right of the purchaser and is clawed back if the purchaser is in receipt of any rent from the dwelling-house/apartment other than rent received under the rent-a-room scheme within 5 years of the date of execution of the deed. The relief is applied by charging duty only on the value of the site or one quarter of the total value of the site plus building agreement, less VAT, whichever figure is the greater or on one quarter of the total consideration, less VAT where a completed house is being purchased.

First time purchaser relief, Section 92B of the Stamp Duties Consolidation Act 1999. There were 72 cases amounting to €445,682 clawed back. This relief is granted where the purchaser or purchasers at the date of execution of the deed had not individually or jointly with any other person or persons previously purchased another dwelling-house or apartment or part of another dwelling-house or apartment. The relief is granted to owner occupiers or where the property is occupied by some person in right of the purchaser and is clawed back if the purchaser is in receipt of any rent from the dwelling-house/apartment other than rent under the rent-a-room scheme within 5 years of the date of execution of the deed.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 224: To ask the Minister for Finance if a person (details supplied) can elect to have the subsidies assessed for tax over the three years, that is 2006, 2007 and 2008 when they are submitting accounts for year ended 31 March 2006 in order to satisfy their 2006 tax return; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40008/06]

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

I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that Section 29 of the Finance Act, 2005 made provision to allow farmers to elect to have certain farm subsidy payments, otherwise taxable in 2005, spread over the three years 2005, 2006 and 2007 for income tax purposes. The provision applied to individuals engaged in the trade of farming in the tax year 2005 who were in receipt of payments in 2005 under both the new EU Single Payment Scheme and the terminated FEOGA Schemes. It provided that a farmer could opt not to have the payments received in 2005 under the terminated FEOGA scheme taxed in full in that year but rather spread for tax purposes over the years 2005, 2006 and 2007. The provision applies only to the year of assessment 2005.

In most cases, receipts of the year 2005 were taxable in that year. However, some farmers because of their choice of accounts year, are taxable in 2006 on certain amounts received in 2005. There is no three year spread available to those farmers. The person referred to by the Deputy seems, on the basis of the details supplied, to be such a farmer and to be outside the scope of the scheme.

The scheme was specifically tailored to alleviate the position of those who would otherwise have to pay tax on both Single Farm Payments and FEOGA payments in the tax year 2005. The person referred to by the Deputy has an accounts year ending in March. The accounts year April 2004 to March 2005 would, therefore, form the basis for taxation in the tax year 2005. As both Single Farm Payments and FEOGA payments were not made in this accounts year (Single Farm Payments were not made until late 2005), the Finance Act 2005 measure does not apply to the person in question because that person was not subject to tax in the first place on both payments in the tax year 2005. On the basis of the information supplied, payments were made to the person in question in late, 2005 and, consequently, these were taxable in 2006, rather than 2005.