Duncan Smith (Dublin Fingal, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

257. To ask the Minister for Finance if his Department will consider prioritising defibrillators among the various other VAT reduction and removal measures that may be under consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11207/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 257 and 262 together.

As the Deputies will be aware, the EU Commission published a proposal on the reform of VAT rates in January 2018 which would allow Member States more flexibility in how they apply VAT rates. The compromise text agreed at ECOFIN in December has been amended significantly in comparison to the original proposal so the EU Parliament will once again be consulted for their opinion.

Once the Parliament has issued its opinion on the proposal, the Council will formally adopt the directive. It will then enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

In the interim officials in my Department will be reviewing the options now available to Ireland in setting VAT rates. Future tax changes are generally taken in the context of the Budget. Deputies will be aware that my officials prepare a series of papers containing tax options for the Tax Strategy Group to be considered in the context of the budgetary process, alongside a wide range of submissions from various stakeholders and lobby groups.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

258. To ask the Minister for Finance if consideration will be given to amending section 865(4) of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 that permits the Revenue Commissioners to not make refunds due to taxpayers if the refund relates to a tax year more than four years previously; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11305/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am advised by Revenue that section 865 of the Taxes Consolidation Act (TCA) 1997 provides a general right to repayment of tax where a person has paid tax which is not due.  However, section 865(4) of the TCA provides that that right is subject to the making of a claim within a statutory limit of four years after the end of the chargeable period to which the claim relates.  That statutory limit is binding on Revenue as well as on taxpayers.  Determinations of the Tax Appeals Commission in differing appellant circumstances confirm that there is no discretion in the application of the four-year rule for claiming repayments.

Section 865 was introduced in 2003 and provides a statutory general right to repayment of tax as well as payment of interest, subject to the four-year time limit.  It provides that no repayment may be made based on claims submitted more than four years after the end of the chargeable period to which they relate.  Prior to its introduction there was no statutory right to repayment, though a taxpayer could sue for repayment under common law.  The Minister at that time indicated that, in introducing the new arrangements, he was satisfied that they achieved the necessary balance between establishing a fair and uniform system for taxpayers while providing necessary protection for the Exchequer. I am satisfied that that continues to be the position

When section 865 was introduced, Revenue’s general right to raise assessments or make enquiries in relation to taxpayer returns was also reduced to four years, although in certain circumstances, for example where fraud or neglect is suspected or in the context of the application of general anti-avoidance rules, Revenue's right to raise assessments or make enquiries is not time limited.  Previously, the general time limit on the raising of assessments by Revenue had been ten years. The provision of a four-year time limit for Revenue raising assessments and making enquiries and for taxpayers to claim a repayment of tax creates parity between both positions.  An increase in one limit would have to be considered in the context of corresponding increases in other time limits in order to preserve that parity.

I have no plans at this time to amend the four-year limit in section 865.