Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Finance in view of the recently published report and accounts for the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation for the six months ending June 2012, which state that IBRC will be wound down by 2020, the way the claw back of any ultimate losses at the National Asset Management Agency pursuant to section 225 of the NAMA Act will be affected by this; and specifically the way NAMA will clawback any losses from IBRC in view of the fact that IBRC accounts for €44billion of the €74billion of loans acquired by NAMA, when section 225 of the NAMA Act provides for losses to be clawed back from participating institutions proportional to the value of loans originally acquired. [38495/12]

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am advised by NAMA that, earlier this year, its Board completed a review of its strategy and re-affirmed its expectation that NAMA remains on course to recoup for the taxpayer, at a minimum, the Senior Bonds issued as consideration for acquired loans, in addition to recovery of its carrying costs and the working and development capital expenditure it has advanced to debtors. Based on the Agency's record to date, I have no reason to doubt that the Agency will achieve its targets over its lifetime. In relation to Section 225 of the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009, the Deputy will be aware that a surcharge may be applied to the participating institutions only in the event of underlying losses being incurred by NAMA over its lifetime. The provision does not operate until the conclusion of NAMA's operations and the overall position of the taxpayer will be taken into account when considering the application of any surcharge.

As indicated in the answer to PQ 38494/12 the 2020 date referred to the winding up of the loan book not the winding up of the bank. At this stage, I would regard it as premature to speculate as to the respective dates on which NAMA and IBRC may be dissolved and on the mechanism by which a surcharge would be applied if IBRC were to be dissolved first. This is particularly the case given, as I have indicated above, that there is no reason to expect that it will be necessary to invoke Section 225 of the Act.