Deposit account trawl announced today (Fri May 23rd) by revenue

Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

Now if you wouldn't mind synopsizing it please
Click to expand...
The revenue want your money.
With any luck, people won't understand this document, and in a few years time, the revenue will be able to whack on a load more 'charges' and 'interest'.
The end.
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

RedDevil said:
"and while in recent years DIRT satsfied all Tax due on interest regardless of the marginal rate of tax of the taxpayer,"

Is this correct even if you are on 41%
Click to expand...
Yes. But as I mentioned above as far as I know if you earn more than a certain amount in deposit interest in any tax year then PRSI may also be an issue. Can somebody clarify if/when this is the case and if this is also a focus of the latest Revenue push?
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

I don't think PRSI is a factor - the amounts would not be worth it.
They are just looking for large deposits where the original source of the money was not taxed.
So Paddy the Plasterer or Brian the Blocklayer or Arthur the Accountant - doing jobs for cash who declares 30k income but has savings of 50k in a year might have to explain where this came from.
The revenue has the power to get details of all accounts where the interest is over 635 a year. At 5% interest - that is most accounts with more than 13k!
Credit Unions are not exempt - but they don't have to start providing info till 2009. The rest of the institutions have to go back to 2005. Seems a but unfair to me?
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

Hi all! I sold my PPR in 2006. Although the net gain (c€150k) was not liable for CGT - should I have declared this in 2007 tax return?

I am PAYE and have never completed a tax return. This money is still on deposit - do I need to declare this now?

Thanks
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

I think its worth repeating the extract from the Revenue statement, that I quoted earlier.

Revenue emphasise that the focus is on money which was undeclared for tax purposes and this current initiative will affect a relatively small number of taxpayers.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

Just to be clear if you have over 100K in savings having saved it from your Paye salary over the years, you don't have to do anything. Or if you sold your house and deposited the gain of more than 100K, having paid any taxes due on it you don't have to do anything. But there maybe an issue in relation to PRSI if the interest if over 3K annually (according to Clubman). This 'amnesty' only applied to people who have over 100K in deposit accounts but that money is hot money, it came from untaxed income (cash jobs or whatever) and if you declare it now they will tax you but treat you kindly, no publicity, nor penalties and interest - have I got it correct?
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

Bronte said:
But there maybe an issue in relation to PRSI if the interest if over 3K annually
Click to expand...

I honestly think that the PRSI issue is a red herring in relation to the recent Revenue announcement. Revenue have made clear that their focus is solely on untaxed income. Hence their assurance that "this current initiative will affect a relatively small number of taxpayers".
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

ubiquitous said:
I honestly think that the PRSI issue is a red herring in relation to the recent Revenue announcement.
Click to expand...
Fair enough if it is. I only raised it because (a) it may be a liability that some people have and (b) it was not clear from the original Revenue press release/statement what the specific focus of this trawl was.
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

Do bear in mind that the above is merely my own personal opinion. Others are free to disagree as they see fit. As always, discussions on sites such as this are no substitute for informed professional advice, when dealing with real-life tax issues.
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

People have asked many times how long they should keep their tax records. It appears it would be a good idea to keep them forever.

If one has managed through prudent use of income over say 20 or 30 years to build up savings of €100k and the revenue are asking questions one would like to have the proof of where it came from.

Do revenue records go back that far
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

That's a good point Black Sheep, if you do have 100K saved over 20 years and you're asked how did you accumulate it is it good enough to say I've been saving all my working life, which is a normal enough response. Would that satisfy Revenue. Not many people keep all their records.

Re the PRSI it surely is important because if you owe tax they will probably also ask you for the PRSI as well. Not sure if there are penalties and interest on unpaid PRSI.
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

Again just my own personal opinion - I think its important for people to keep this sort of thing in perspective. It is not a crime to save money. If you have been saving money over long periods and having been paying tax on your earnings as you go along (as have 99% of people) then you have nothing to fear. On the other hand if you have earned significant sums from undeclared work or business income or capital gains, and haven't paid the appropriate taxes, then its important to address this.
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

All earnings have been declared and taxed and I haven't reached the €100k mark yet but was just making the point if revenue are targeting the people with savings of €100k have they got the records of 20 or 30 years to seperate those who have paid their taxes from those who havn't
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

What do you mean? They probably don't need them. If they suspect tax evasion or unacceptable (as opposed to acceptable) tax avoidance then I believe that they can put the onus on the individual to prove/evidence to them that there is nothing untoward going on.
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

Why would anyone in this current climate of bank problems have any more that the equivilant of £35k stirling in a single banks account any way.

You are not insured for any more money than that in the UK and I would think it may be similar in Eire. so if the bank goes bust you lose £65k. Spread it around in different banks and that would also avoid the tak problems legally i would think.
 
Re: Deposit account trawl announced today by revenue

CharlieR said:
Spread it around in different banks and that would also avoid the tak problems legally i would think.
Click to expand...
Spreading it around different banks has absolutely NO impact on your tax liability. While it might manage to avoid Revenue's attention in this current trawl, it is just a matter of time before they lower the thresholds and accumulate balances across different banks. Allowing even more interest to build up on any liability to Revenue is not a particularly smart strategy.
 
this is obviously a strategy by revenue to catch out all the "amateur investors" who made a killing during the boom years,who a now liable for 1. the original stamp duty that should have been paid 2. the capital gains on disposal. There's plenty of them out there !.
 
Do you have a bank insurance system in Eire? If so what is the limit?

I was thinking more along the lines that if a bank goes bump you will lose an awful lot of cash.

Charlie
 
CharlieR said:
Do you have a bank insurance system in Eire? If so what is the limit?

I was thinking more along the lines that if a bank goes bump you will lose an awful lot of cash.

Charlie
Click to expand...
What has this got to do with the original subject matter!!? :confused:

There are numerous existing threads discussing the deposit protection schemes covering banks authorised by the Irish (IFSRA/CB) and other EU authorities.
 
thewatcher said:
this is obviously a strategy by revenue to catch out all the "amateur investors" who made a killing during the boom years,who a now liable for 1. the original stamp duty that should have been paid 2. the capital gains on disposal. There's plenty of them out there !.
Click to expand...

Am I naive in thinking that there wouldn't be huge amounts of CGT evasion? I thought that solicitors had a legal responsibility to ensure that this was paid when they handled a sale?

I guess there may be people who took advantage of the stamp duty exemption and then rented out the house. But surely the stamp duty is only the tip of the iceberg in this case, and the tax due on the rental income is likely to be far more substantial?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top