Ciarán Lynch (Cork South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

70. To ask the Minister for Finance if it is intended that the effects of the emergency pension levy on private pensions (details supplied) will be reversed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26488/15]

John Halligan (Waterford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

73. To ask the Minister for Finance when the Government will honour its commitment to reduce the 0.75% pension levy, given that the original levy introduced in 2006 at 0.6% and the increase of a further 0.15% in 2014 were both intended to be temporary measures; his views that the introduction of the levy has resulted in a vast reduction in the number of persons taking up private pensions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26555/15]

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

76. To ask the Minister for Finance his views on correspondence (details supplied) regarding pensions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26643/15]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 70, 73 and 76 together.

The original 0.6% stamp duty levy on pension fund assets ended last year. The additional levy of 0.15% which I introduced for 2014 and 2015, mainly to help continue to fund Jobs Initiative, will also end after this year. There are well-documented reasons why many individuals are not investing or not investing sufficiently in pension saving. I do not believe the pension fund levies to be a principal reason among these.

The position is that the equivalent value of all of the money raised from the stamp duty levy has been used to fund the wide range of measures introduced in the Jobs Initiative to protect existing jobs and to help create new jobs and the Initiative has been a success in this regard.  The measures introduced include expenditure measures such as the Jobbridge and Springboard schemes, as well as a number of tax and PRSI incentives such as the reduction in the VAT rate from 13.5% to 9% for the tourism and hospitality sectors and the halving of the lower employer PRSI rate.

The pension fund stamp duty levies are charged on the trustees of pension schemes and others (including insurance companies) who have responsibility for the management of the assets of pension schemes or plans. It is up to the trustees of pension schemes, for example, to decide whether and how the impact of the levy should be passed on and who should be impacted and to what extent. I have no detailed information on the decisions made by pension fund trustees or others in relation to the passing on of the full or a partial impact of the levy to the current, deferred or former (retired) members of pension schemes. I am aware, however, that where trustees have made the decision to pass on the impact or part of the impact of the levy to pensioners that a smaller reduction in pension payments over the lifetime of the pension may have been made in many cases in preference to a larger reduction over a shorter period.

While the pension fund levies have ceased and will be ceased as I have already outlined, I have no plans to repay the pension fund levy collected as may be implied in the questions. The value of the funds raised by way of the levy have been used to protect and create jobs and this has helped to create the improving financial and economic position of the State.

Taxpayers to whom the impact of the levy may have been passed on by the chargeable persons responsible for the payment of the levy will benefit from the changes which I began in Budget 2015 and which will continue in future Budgets to reduce the tax burden on those on low and middle incomes.

As regards serving and retired public servants, I am informed by my colleague the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform that the application of the pension-related deduction (PRD) to serving public servants resulted in an average reduction of some 7% in the remuneration of public servants (from March 2009) and was followed by a further reduction of 6% from 1 January 2010 in the remuneration rates applicable to public servants. A third pay reduction applied to public servants earning in excess of €65,000 with effect from 1 July 2013 at rates ranging from 5.5% to 10%.  The public service pension reduction (PSPR) imposed reductions from 1 January 2011 on public service pensions in payment in excess of €12,000 per annum using a progressively tiered set of bands and rates. The measure, as introduced, resulted in an average reduction of 4% to public service pensions with much higher reductions for those on higher pensions. Further reductions for higher public service pensions were introduced in July 2013.

While changes to the PRD and PSPR are proposed to start from next year which will result in reductions in the PRD and the PSPR, particularly affecting public servants on low and middle incomes and retired public servants in receipt of low pensions, there is no provision for the repayment of PRD or PSPR already deducted from the remuneration or pensions of the affected individuals.