Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 103: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the tax reduction in respect of three full-time single employees in their thirties, with the same PRSI class, the same health levy, the same basic tax credits making the same contribution to their PRSA of €5,000 a year, where none makes other pension contribution or receives further pension benefit, but where one earns €34,000, one €54,000, and one €154,000; the maximum possible contribution to their pension that each qualifies for if they were to maximise their pension contribution; and the maximum possible tax reduction that each qualifies for if they were to maximise their pension contributions. [28780/07]

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

I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the query raised by the Deputy regarding Personal Retirement Savings Accounts (PRSAs) gives rise to two separate and distinct issues: (a) the maximum possible pension contribution that can be made; and (b) the maximum tax relief attributable to the various scenarios outlined by the Deputy. As regards (a), this is a matter for the individuals and the relevant pension providers. As regards (b), I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the maximum tax relief for pension contributions (i.e. contributions to occupational pensions schemes, additional voluntary contributions, PRSAs, etc.) cannot, in the aggregate, exceed the following percentages of an individual's net relevant earnings.

The tax relief due in the scenarios outlined by the Deputy is set out. There may also be savings on PRSI and the Health Contribution Levy.

The tax relief due in the scenarios outlined by the Deputy is set out in the next table. There may also be savings on PRSI and the Health Contribution Levy.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 104: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if changes have been made to the child spouse section of the Civil Service pension scheme in relation to a single person who has made major financial contributions to the pension without financial gain to themselves, in view of the fact that they did not initially sign a contract or agreement for such deductions; his plans to reassess this aspect of the pension if no changes have taken place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28805/07]

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

As Minister for Finance I have primary responsibility for the Civil Service Pension Schemes. The Deputy is aware that under current arrangements, appointment to a pensionable post in the Civil Service is conditional on (i) membership of the Main Superannuation Scheme which provides for the member's own pension benefits and (ii) membership of an associated Spouses' and Children's Scheme which covers pensions for spouses and children. Compulsory membership of the Spouses' and Children's scheme is on foot of negotiated agreements between the Civil Service unions and management.

The spouses' and children's schemes effectively provide insurance for contingency benefits. The schemes are designed on a group insurance basis and the member contribution rate is structured accordingly. The total cost of the schemes is borne on a 50/50 basis by the employer and employees.

The original Spouses' and Children's Scheme, introduced in 1969, did provide that members who remained unmarried throughout their service will be refunded their relevant contributions in full. However, a revised Scheme was introduced for all established officers on 1 September 1984 and for unestablished officers on 1 June 1986. The revised terms improved the original schemes by extending cover to "whole of life" rather than "whole of employment" situations and covering spouses and children of post retirement marriages. At the same time the circumstances in which contributions are refunded were greatly restricted. Generally, refunds are confined, in the revised schemes, to situations where service is less than two years (no entitlement or possible entitlement), or where more than 40 years (maximum possible benefit) contributions have been made.

The Commission on Public Service Pensions considered the question of compulsory membership for single people and the non-refundable nature of the contributions paid by them and decided not to recommend any change in the existing scheme rules. No consideration is being given, at present, to changing this approach to the non-refunding of contributions.