Written answers

Wednesday, 28 March 2007

Department of Social and Family Affairs

Tax and Social Welfare Codes

9:00 pm

Photo of John CreganJohn Cregan (Limerick West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 219: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the situation in relation to the rules regarding categories of workers who had to pay PRSI during the years 1967 to 1974; if the necessity to pay contributions was based on income or category of workers; the definition of manual or non-manual workers; the reason some workers were refused the opportunity to pay contributions, while others deemed manual were allowed pay even if on higher wages; if this discriminatory provision was ever challenged legally or set aside by an appeals officer; and if people with gaps in their record can now have their contributions restored or can they be given the right to purchase them back. [11915/07]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Until 1974, liability for social insurance contributions was compulsory for almost all workers over the age of sixteen years who were either manual workers employed under a contract of service, regardless of their remuneration, or non-manual workers whose remuneration did not exceed a specified limit.

The remuneration limit in 1974 was £1,600 per annum for full-time workers or equivalent for part-time workers. This had been increased from £600 per annum from 5 January, 1953, £800 per annum from December, 1958, £1,200 from September, 1965, and £1,600 from May, 1971 until the remuneration limit was removed on 31st March, 1974. There were no changes to insurance liability in 1967.

The removal of the remuneration limit was due to the recognition that traditional differences in pay and conditions between manual and non-manual workers had been gradually eroded, that the borderline between what constitutes manual work and non-manual work had become blurred and that similar arrangements in European social security codes were gradually being removed. Accordingly, it was decided there were arguments for treating manual and non-manual workers equally within the social insurance system.

There is no record of a legal challenge in relation to these provisions. Decisions made by Appeals Officers some thirty five years ago are not now available.

Where a non-manual worker reached the insurable limit and was therefore no longer compulsorily insured, the legislation enabled that worker to make voluntary contributions provided he or she had a minimum of 156 contributions paid and applied within a prescribed period.

There is no scope in legislation to facilitate the payment of contributions that were not due or to retrospectively pay social insurance contributions for which a person was not liable. However, in recognition of the fact that some workers may have been in and out of insurance coverage over their working life because of fluctuations in their earnings, special arrangements were put in place in 1988 with the introduction of special partial pensions related to the average of the contributions paid, subject to a minimum average of five full-rate contributions paid or credited.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.