I like your style!Try doing it this way
Take your 6k take home from your 12.5k earnings.
Then borrow 6.5 K from your wife.
Make a 12.5k AVC.
Claim back 5k tax refund.
Give the tax refund plus 1.5k (taken from your tax credits, generously provided by the government) back to your wife.
Your 12.5k AVC will have cost you 7.5k.
You have received a 40% tax refund.
But unfortunately borrowing 4k/6.5k appears to be a Revenue forbidden catalyst, required in order to make the "reaction" work.
Not wishing to burst any bubbles, but under Revenue rules you cannot borrow funds to invest in an AVC.
Borrow for AVC to reduce tax bill?
Hi Guys Last year I had a tax bill for an investment property of c. €8k. Instead of paying the tax, I made a €20k contribution to an AVC thus reducing the tax due to €0. I am PAYE primarily but self assess for the rental property. I'll be in the same situation this year but won't have the €20k...
www.askaboutmoney.com
Additionally, most of most people's money is already taxed, including that of our spouses.
As borrowing is excluded, the population as a whole cannot average greater than investing net income in an AVC.
So the net income then becomes the notional "grossed up" income.
In this example the €6k would be the amount invested and the rebate would be only €2.4k.
Clearly it doesn't apply to "strong" savers and savvy investors just to most ordinary people.
Not being allowed to borrow in order to maximise the rebate to which you're entitled is clearly a regulation
designed for the benefit of the exchequer.
The idiocy of looking at rebates from the perspective of the net income rather than the gross income is made
starkly apparent by considering what happens if PRSI and or USC rates are altered.
Doing so not only affects the amount of those deducted, it also affects the amount of tax refunded on AVC contributions.
The calculation needs to be independent of those other deductions and the way to do that is to consider gross
rather than net income.