Snippet data - viewing only, no editing possible


Label

Field name

Field value


Sitting_Date

11/05/2014 12:00:00 AM


Sitting_Forum


Snippet Ref No

SnippetRefNo

TT00100

Selected Quill

SnippetType

14

Saved Quill

SnippetType_C4D


Selected Quill

SnippetType_1

14

Speaker Name

IndxSpeakerName


Business Category

IndxMainHeadCat

Bills

Sub Category

IndxSubTopic

Finance Bill 2014

Topic

IndxQHeadTopic

Second Stage

See Also

SeeAlso


Part1

TitlePart1


Part2

TitlePart2


Part3

TitlePart3


Volume

VolumeNo

856

Book No

BookNo

2

Pdf Ref

PdfPageRef


Default Business Index

IndexViewCategoryDefault


3 Part Title Business Index

IndexViewCategoryTitle


Default Topic Index

IndexViewCategoryDefaultSpeaker

Finance Bill 2014\Second Stage
Bills\Finance Bill 2014\Second Stage

3 Part Topic Index

IndexViewCategoryTitleSpeaker


Motion Code

MotionCode


Motion Title

MotionTitle


Stage

MotionStage


Amendment No

MotionAmendmentNo


Bill Code

BillCode

B2r

Bill Title

BillTitle

Finance Bill 2014

Stage

BillStage

Second Stage (Resumed)

Section

BillSection


Statement Code

StatementCode


Statement Title

StatementTitle


Stage

StatementStage


Hour Indicator

HourIndicator

Not applicable

Procedural Instruction

Procedural_Instruction

No

Debate Adjourned

DebateAdjourned

No

Question Askee

QAskee


Question Asker

QAsker


Question Department

QDept


Question ID

QID


Question Reference

QRef


Question Speaker PID

QSpeakerPID


Question Speaker PID To

QSpeakerPIDTo


Questions Asked

QUESTIONSASKED


Speaker Type

SpeakerType


Speaker Name

Senator


Deputy


Minister


Witness


Chairman


ViceChairman


ActingChairmanD


ActingChairmanS


Speaker4Display

Speaker4Display


Speaker

Speaker


SpeakerPID

SpeakerPID


SpeakerText

SpeakerText


OriginalUnidSnippet

OriginalUnidSnippet

984807D36E0506EA80257D87006B8DBF

LastModifiedSnippet

LastModifiedSnippet

09/22/2016 12:11:47 PM

TopicIndex1stCategoryValues

TopicIndex1stCategoryValues

Snippet Contents:

Will the funding be made available to financial institutions other than the pillar banks for distribution to applicants such as entrepreneurs and the people behind start-up companies?
There is currently an advertisement on television for AIB, a bank that needed one of the bigger State bailouts. In the advertisement, self-employed people in small businesses are described as brave. The bank is giving the impression that it is eager to lend to self-employed people, but the experience of many self-employed people is that whatever money is lent to them will come at a high interest rate and there may be a requirement for personal guarantees. If the bailed-out banks were lending to the self-employed and small businesses, the Government would not have needed to set up the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland. It is clear that repairing their balance sheets is more important to banks than lending for job creation. I know a business whose owners tried valiantly to get money from AIB but failed to do so.
Lip service is continuously paid to small and medium enterprises, SMEs, and the self-employed, which are responsible for 69% of the workforce. That is well and good, but action speaks louder than words, especially as the self-employed have been hammered in this budget. The universal social charge has been imposed at the top rate of 11% for self-employed people, while a person who is not self-employed is charged a top rate of 8%. This is a serious matter. Much of the budget discussion focused on taxation of multinational enterprises, but although these companies account for a large proportion of exports, they employ only a small share of our workforce; 99% of Irish-owned firms are SMEs and 69% of private-sector workers are employed by SMEs. Employment in SMEs has fallen much further since 2008 than the corresponding rate for multinationals.
Future economic growth depends on SMEs and our individual entrepreneurs, but despite a great deal of rhetoric about the importance of the self-employed and SMEs, some of the provisions of the budget are detrimental to the sector. There is no possible justification for the 11% USC rate to be imposed on the self-employed, particularly as they are not entitled to the same level of benefits as those people on lower rates. Given the outrage about the low levels of corporation tax paid by Apple and other multinational companies, it is worth noting that the 11% rate paid by a self-employed person earning more than €100,000 is approximately the same as the percentage of profits paid in tax by multinationals. Unlike the multinationals, however, the self-employed person faces a 40% marginal rate of income tax in addition to PRSI contributions. What is the justification for a marginal income tax rate of 55% for self-employed people? As a PAYE worker, I pay a marginal rate of 52%. It could be argued that, given the level of insecurity and risk that the self-employed have, they should pay a lower marginal rate than those people in secure employment. Some left-wing politicians and commentators seem to think all self-employed people are well off, when some take home little more than what they would earn on the minimum wage. The tax system has changed since the 1980s and 1990s, when the PAYE tax credit was introduced, and it is time for this to be made available to self-employed people.
Despite the rhetoric we constantly hear that Government policy should support the self-employed and people setting up small businesses, the income tax system discriminates shamefully against the self-employed. A self-employed worker with annual earnings of €15,000 - less than the average industrial wage, which we all want to rise above €30,000 - will next year pay 14.9% of his or her gross income in tax. If I worked in a job on that wage in the PAYE sector, I would have to pay 1.9% of my gross income in tax. The self-employed person will pay €2,235, which is almost eight times the €285 that I would pay if I earned that wage. The self-employed person would also be entitled to fewer benefits despite his or her larger tax contribution. After the collapse of the building industry in 2008, many self-employed building workers found themselves almost destitute. Despite having paid substantial amounts of income tax, they found that in some cases they were eligible only for strictly means-tested supplementary welfare allowances.
Far from being a path to riches, being self-employed or establishing a small business in Ireland is often a high-risk activity with little return. One of the most misleading figures quoted about Irish industry is that it is the most profitable in the European Union. When the multinationals are removed from the picture, Irish firms are among the least profitable in the European Union, as they are third from the bottom of the list, above only Lithuania and France. Employer PRSI is low in Ireland, but other business costs such as energy and professional services are among the highest in the European Union. I have always called for a mandatory social welfare system to be introduced for the sector, with self-employed people paying for it. They would not be afraid to do so.
The biggest social issue facing us as a people is the scarcity of housing, especially social housing. More than 100,000 of our citizens do not have access to housing, with many more living in substandard accommodation. This has come about because of a withdrawal from the construction of social housing by central Government, and I am glad to see a proposal to spend over €2.2 billion on public sector housing over the next three years. This will give much-needed employment, especially in rural areas, but these allocations should be unbundled so as to allow small, tax-compliant and efficient building contractors to get into a position to tender for smaller bundles of housing projects. The €2.2 billion figure is clearly inadequate, as it will provide approximately 10,000 new public housing units. That amount must be at least doubled in order to tackle the housing crisis. My colleague, Deputy Brendan Ryan, brought forward a very worthwhile document in this regard and we must implement its recommendations in order to tackle this crisis.
In my county of Westmeath, up to 3,000 households are now on the housing list, and this must be addressed by a sustained house-building programme. With rents increasing, the problem will get worse as more people seek social housing. The issue can no longer be put on the long finger. My colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, clearly understands the matter, and I have every confidence in his ability and vision to tackle it wholeheartedly.
I welcome the commitment to end the pension levy next year. This will give some degree of certainty to people with a pension, who felt deeply aggrieved because of this imposition. There are a multitude of pension issues to be addressed, and whatever the shape or membership of any future Government, it will have to confront a related issue. Some of the loony-bin economic theories will not be of much use in this complex area. What will happen when the social insurance fund deficit, which is approximately €320 billion, has to be considered as part of the overall Government finances? This will happen in 2017 under EU rules.
It is important to recognise the role of agriculture and the efforts of the farming community to achieve the targets set out in Harvest 2020. The abolition of milk quotas next April will be an opportunity in this regard. I especially welcome the increase in the period of income averaging from three to five years from 2015, with a 50% increase in the amount of income that can be exempted for the purpose of qualifying long-term leases taken out after 1 January. The lower age threshold of 40 years has been removed in the eligibility requirements for the long-term leasing tax relief. I also endorse what was said about active farmers with regard to the taxation review. I urge the Minister of State to amend this.