Written answers

Tuesday, 23 September 2014

Department of Finance

Revenue Commissioners Enforcement Activity

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

153. To ask the Minister for Finance the number of cases of legal action which were initiated against the Revenue Commissioners' sheriffs in the past five years; of each case, the number which were settled out of court and the number of settlements which contained secrecy clauses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35878/14]

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

180. To ask the Minister for Finance the number of the approximately 30,000 actions of the Revenue Commissioners' sheriffs in 2011, 2012 and 2013 which involved the seizure of computers; if he will indicate how this equipment is stored and the way in which they were sold off; the estimated value of the seizures and the total sums realised from sales; and if he is satisfied that this is carried out in compliance with existing data protection legislation. [35873/14]

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

181. To ask the Minister for Finance the number of the approximately 30,000 actions of the Revenue Commissioners' sheriffs in 2011, 2012 and 2013 which involved the seizure of tools of a trade and third party items seized; and the way in which this was monitored. [35875/14]

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

182. To ask the Minister for Finance the number of cases of legal action which were initiated against the Revenue Commissioners in the past five years; the number of cases of legal action which were initiated against the Revenue Commissioners' sheriffs in the past five years; of each case, the number which were settled out of court and the number of settlements which contained secrecy clauses. [35877/14]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 153 and 180 to 182, inclusive, together.

I am advised by Revenue that it only refers outstanding tax arrears cases to its enforcement agents, including Sheriffs, where there has been no realistic engagement by the defaulting taxpayer to agree mutually acceptable payment solutions. Revenue's commitment in this regard is clearly evidenced by the fact that in each of the years specified by the Deputy there were almost 16,000 taxpayers facilitated with phased payment arrangements in preference to deploying debt collection/enforcement options.

As I have advised the Deputy in reply to previous questions on this issue, Sheriffs are officers of the Court, holding office under Section 12 of the Court Officers Act, 1945 and are not accountable to Revenue for their debt collection activities. Their activities in this regard are generally covered by the Enforcement of Court Orders Act, 1926, as amended. The execution of Revenue certificates (warrants) is specifically provided for in Section 960L of the Taxes Consolidated Act 1997, as amended. When acting in execution of such tax certificates, Sheriffs are governed by the general law, which applies to the collection of civil debts of all kinds, and not by the provisions of the Tax Acts and are answerable before the courts for any breach of the civil debt collection law.

For this reason, data is not collated by Revenue in a manner that would facilitate the provision of a response to the Deputy's questions relating to the seizure, storage and sale of goods, including tools of the trade and computers, by Sheriffs in the years 2011, 2012 and 2013. Revenue could confirm to me however that Sheriffs only undertake seizures in a very small minority of cases and only after the defaulting taxpayer has not engaged with requests for payment. The money secured by the Sheriffs through such activities is paid over to Revenue in settlement or part settlement of the outstanding debt minus the operational fees and expenses incurred.

As I have also previously informed the Deputy, I understand that the Sheriffs operate a Code of Practice, available from any Sheriff or on Revenue's website, which sets out how Sheriffs will engage with taxpayers in relation to their tax collection enforcement activities. For example, it includes commitments that when goods are seized, a written inventory is given to the taxpayer as soon as possible, and there is a commitment to furnish the taxpayer with an account of the proceeds of the sale of any goods seized. The Code also sets out the process whereby a taxpayer may make a complaint and how it will be handled.

In regard to Question 35873/14 relating to data protection, this issue is primarily a matter for my colleague the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to answer. However, I am informed that Sheriffs are subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Acts and I believe that the Minister has already responded to the Deputy on this issue.

In regard to Question 35877/14, since January 2009, there have been 125 legal cases in total (not relating to Sheriff action) initiated against Revenue, consisting of 76 general court actions and 49 judicial reviews. Of these, Revenue reached settlement in ten cases with three cases subject to confidentiality clauses. Cases are only settled following legal advice from the Revenue Solicitor's Division and Counsel. Confidentiality clauses are standard practice in the settlement of cases and are subject to negotiation between both parties' legal representatives.

Revenue has also received personal injury and property damage claims that are handled by the State Claims Agency as delegated to it under the National Treasury Management Agency (Amendment) Act 2000. Statistics for these claims since January 2009 is not currently available to Revenue and will be forwarded as soon as received from the State Claims Agency.

Because Sheriffs are not directly accountable to Revenue, the Commissioners do not have data in relation to the number of cases of legal action taken against them (the Sheriffs) in the past five years.

Revenue does however liaise with the individual Sheriffs through a dedicated unit that ensures the timeliness and accuracy of referrals and payments between both parties and also deals with various issues that arise in individual cases. Given the number of Questions that the Deputy has raised on this issue to date, it may be that she has a particular case in mind. That being the situation, Revenue has confirmed to me that it will investigate the circumstances of the case with the relevant Sheriff if the Deputy provides the case details.

Finally, I am satisfied that Revenue operates a very balanced approach in the deployment of its enforcement powers including referrals to the Sheriffs. I specifically want to commend the Commissioners for taking a proactive approach where possible in assisting viable businesses and taxpayers to meet their tax obligations through agreed arrangements in preference to debt collection/enforcement proceedings.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.