Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1956 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1954 - 1955

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Dé hAoine, 13 Iúil, 1956.

Friday, 13th July, 1956.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

Liam Ó Cadhla (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste) and Mr. T. K. Whitaker (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN.

1. Deputy Sheldon.—I propose the outgoing Chairman, Deputy Carter, for re-election.

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—I have great pleasure in seconding.

Question put, and agreed to.

DEPUTY CARTER took the chair.

Chairman.—I wish to thank the Committee for my re-election. We have one new member, Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll, to whom I wish to extend a welcome. We have before us the Appropriation Accounts for the year 1954-55, with the Report of the Auditor General. Before we begin consideration of the various accounts, there are a few points I should like to make. Firstly, I should like to say that last year I was fortunate, as Chairman, in having the assistance of a number of experienced Deputies who had been members of the Committee for a number of years. Next, I should like to point out that it is desirable that members of the Committee should direct their questions to the various Accounting Officers. The members are entitled to ask them for any information arising out of their examination of the accounts, but it is not desirable to go into matters of policy. I should like the co-operation of the Committee in that matter. We shall now go through the various headings.

GENERAL REPORT.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called and examined.

2. Chairman.—Paragraph 1 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Out-turn of the Year.

1. The figures in the accounts as rendered to me are summarised on page xxxvii. The total amount to be surrendered as shown in the summary is £8,824,127 18s. 5d., arrived at as follows:—

This represents 7.8 per cent. of the supply grants, as compared with 6 per cent. in the previous year. The principal savings were:—

In no case has the provision made by Dáil Eireann been exceeded and no excess Vote is, therefore, necessary.”

Chairman.—On the out-turn of the year, I notice that the amount surrendered is slightly higher than last year? Is that due to a change in policy?—It is mainly due to the fact that in the Budget of 1954 various economies were proposed in the Estimates as submitted, and most of these economies were, in fact, achieved, with the result that there is a larger surrender than usual. One of them, £800,000 in the Defence Vote, is referred to later in the Report.

3. Deputy Sheldon. — How much of these savings would be due to the capital side? Take Health, for instance?—The savings are a mixture of capital and current account savings. In the case of Health, the saving is largely on the capital subhead for hospital building grants.

4. Chairman. — Regarding the paragraph on the Foreign Exchange Account, I understand it is set up under the provisions of Section 49 of the Finance Act of 1941. Is it intended that this should be a permanent feature?—We have not yet thought of liquidating the account. It is useful at certain times to have even a small reserve of foreign exchange at our immediate disposal.

Where do the receipts come from into the account—I mean the bulk of the receipts?—Receipts arise from dividends on investments.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—Many of them are postal remittances, dollars received through the Post Office.

5. Deputy Bartley.—Is this essentially an emergency matter?

Mr. Whitaker.—It had its origin, of course, in the emergency when it was necessary to acquire from Irish citizens dollar balances they held prior to the war. Provision was made in the Finance Act of 1941 for an advance from the Exchequer to cover the cost of acquiring dollar balances from Irish people. As I said earlier, we have held it since because the time did not seem propitious for disbanding the small reserve we had built up in that way.

VOTE 1—PRESIDENT’S ESTABLISHMENT.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 2—HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

6. Deputy Bartley.—On subhead A.— Salaries of Holders of certain Appointed Offices and Allowances of Teachtaí — I notice that a sum of £6,682 was expended less than was granted. My reason for asking about that is that it seems that the amount in respect of allowances to Deputies and to leaders of Parties should be precisely ascertainable.

Deputy Sheldon.—The explanation is on the following page.

Deputy Bartley.—I have just got the Book now and I have not had an opportunity of reading it. I apologise for the waste of time.

7. Deputy Sheldon.—On subhead B.— Travelling Expenses of Teachtaí—I was wondering how it happened that there was this amount of £4,005. Of course, it may be due to the dissolution of the Dáil, thus a saving in travelling expenses of Deputies. It does not seem to apply to Senators. Surely they would be affected by the dissolution.

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—It could also be accounted for by the fact that we have more long-distance Senators?— I take it the question is why the travelling expenses of Senators were up while the expenses of Deputies were down? I am afraid I do not know.

Deputy Sheldon.—I suppose the reason is that the Seanad is never really dissolved until the new Dáil is elected.

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—It could also be accounted for by the fact that we have more long-distance Senators than before.

8. Chairman.—On subhead I.—Inter-Parliamentary Activities—I notice that a high percentage of the Grant-in-Aid was not expended. Was there any particular reason?—The expenditure depends largely on the venue of the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s annual meeting. In this particular year they did not require more than £1,745.

9. On subhead J. — Expenses of the Restaurant—was this money paid out to make good a definite loss?—As you know, the Restaurant is now managed by a Joint Committee of members of both Houses. Payments out of this subhead were made on the certificate of the Ceann Comhairle to cover actual losses and a catering fee. I have no doubt, in fact, that the losses and the fee in that particular year came to the full amount.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—£1,200 was paid to the contractors in respect of their operations in 1953-54. £800 was paid to the Committee on account of losses incurred in 1954-55.

Deputy Bartley.—What period does the £1,200 cover?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—That was money due to the late contractors.

Deputy Sheldon.—A sort of winding up business.

Deputy Bartley.—It would be interesting to be in a position to make a comparison between the operation of the Restaurant by a contractor and by the Committee. I take it that information is not available.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I do not think the time is ripe.

Deputy Sheldon.—We shall leave it.

10. Deputy Sheldon.—On the question of extra receipts payable to the Exchequer how does this matter of the refund of payments arise?—I am afraid I have not got a note of what that is.

Would you have it sent to the Chairman later?—Certainly. *

VOTE 3—DEPARTMENT OF THE TAOISEACH.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

11. Chairman.—On subhead A.— Salaries, Wages and Allowances—the explanatory note says that the saving was due mainly to staff changes, involving the appointment of officers at lower points on the salary scale and the suppression of certain posts. How much of the saving is due to the suppression of posts?— These were changes that were consequent on the change of Government at that time, that is to say, changes in private secretaries and other offices.

VOTE 4—CENTRAL STATISTICS OFFICE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

12. Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—On subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances —is there any special reason why more staff were required in that particular year?

Deputy Sheldon.—It seems peculiar when you look at subhead E. as well?— I am afraid there was some miscalculation at the outset of the extent to which various inquiries would get under way in that year and staff needs were originally underestimated, resulting in the excess expenditure on this subhead.

13. Chairman.—On subhead E.—Special Statistical Inquiries—how is the National Farm Survey carried out?—It began in January, 1955, and it is under way for its second year now. It is carried out under the direction of the Central Statistics Office and immediately under the supervision of a Chief Farm Accounts Officer who, with a subordinate staff, visits various farms chosen for the purpose of the survey, instructs farmers in how to complete the forms which he leaves there and calls back later to give any assistance required. The whole purpose of the survey is to get better information on farm output and expenses on different kinds of farms. There are about 2,000 farms covered by the survey at present.

14. Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—On what basis is the survey made? Is it on a regional or county basis or on the basis of the size of the holding?—Farms distributed all over the country are chosen representing different types of farming so as to give a fully representative view and also so that the survey will disclose differences in costs and conditions in various parts of the country.

This is a survey for statistical purposes only?—Its immediate aim is to fill in details that are missing at present from our National Income Estimates. National Income takes globally the income from agriculture. It does not reveal differences in income arising from variations in the type of farm.

Deputy O’Hara.—There seemed to be a need for a revision of the system?

15. Chairman.—Is the survey expected to take long?—I think the results of the first year are being assembled and may be published before the year is out in the Statistical Journal.

16. Deputy Sheldon.—There is one minor point in connection with which I am trying to do a little multiplication. I note that a farm surveyor’s salary is £410, that there are ten of them and £5,000 is the amount sought. I was wondering how ten times £410 comes to £5,000?—There may be some allowances.

Travelling expenses and subsistence allowances appear to be separately provided for. Is the £410 a basic scale?—It seems to be a flat scale. Perhaps there was some allowance made—by rounding up—for possible extra recruitment in the year.

VOTE 6—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR FINANCE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

17. Chairman.—On subhead A.— Salaries, Wages and Allowances—how much of the saving here is due to staff retrenchment?—Practically all of it. It represents retrenchment on the Exchange Control side where in the last few years we have collapsed our staff by delegating functions we formerly discharged ourselves to the banks and by being more liberal in exchange control.

18. On subhead G.—Appropriations in Aid—in connection with Note (2) what is the explanation of no receipts under this head?—No purchases during the year.

VOTE 11—MANAGEMENT OF GOVERNMENT STOCKS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 12—STATE LABORATORY.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

19. Deputy Sheldon.—On Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer—is there a very good reason why the item for fees for analyses, examinations, etc., and that for Recovery from The Road Fund for the officer engaged on analysis of road-making materials should not be under the heading of Appropriations rather than Extra Receipts? Both of these are very stable?— I think it is a point we could look into now that they do seem to be so stable.

VOTE 13—CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

20. Chairman.—Subhead C.—Examinations—was there a change of programme or why were the examinations not held?— The principal examinations normally held which were not held in that particular year were those for posts as typists, short-hand typists and Post Office Learners. The main reason for that was that, as a result of better organisation, there was no need to recruit extra members to these particular grades. The fact that examinations were not held meant, of course, less expenditure on almost all the other subheads as well.

VOTE 14—AN CHOMHAIRLE EALAÍON.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

21. Chairman.—The account in relation to this grant is laid on the Table of the House. Is that not so?—An abstract of the accounts, with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, is laid under statute before each House of the Oireachtas.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—The annual account in relation to this expenditure was presented to the Oireachtas last February.

VOTE 15—COMMISSIONS AND SPECIAL INQUIRIES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

22. Chairman.—We had a discussion last year on the Commission on Place Names. If there are no questions, we will pass to subhead C. 1.—Civil Service (Compensation) Board.

Deputy Bartley.—Before we pass from C.1.—what does that connote exactly?— It is the Board that inquires into claims for compensation by transferred officers, that is, officers who were transferred at the time of the Treaty.

23. Deputy Sheldon. — In connection with the Rents and Leaseholds Commission and the Company Law Reform Committee, these bodies do not seem to be tearing along at a very rapid rate in dealing with the problems with which they are presented?—I understand that the Company Law Reform Committee has finished its work.

24. Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—When did the Company Law Reform Committee finish its work?—Sometime quite recently, I think.

I had a question down about that committee and the Minister, in reply, told me that the Chairman was sick and the committee could not continue and that he would not have the report until the end of the year?—Perhaps I may be misled by my own note. It says they have ceased to function.

Who is misinforming whom?—I do not know.

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—The Minister said that, because of the Chairman’s illness, the report might not be ready until the end of the year.

Deputy Sheldon.—They may have concluded the taking of evidence, or whatever they were doing. That may be the explanation of your note, Mr. Whitaker.

Mr. Whitaker.—Yes.

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—I had a question down within the last two months.

Mr. Whitaker.—I am going beyond my province in venturing anything about the present position.

25. Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—I take it these figures are last year’s expenditure? Deputy Sheldon’s question arises on 1954-55. This is 1956, and I appreciate it is not your function.

Mr. Whitaker.—We cannot touch on that.

VOTE 16—SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

26. Chairman. — On subhead J.—Pensions to Resigned and Dismissed Royal Irish Constabulary, including Widows— I notice that the provision for the Garda Síochána pensions has been transferred to Vote 30, but you are retaining the provision for resigned and dismissed R.I.C. pensioners. Does that mean that the Department of Finance is no longer the awarding authority in the case of Garda pensioners?—I do not think we have surrendered any of our control over the award of pensions to Gardaí. What is involved is merely a transfer of the incidence of the charge from one Vote to another.

27. Deputy Sheldon. — On Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer I was wondering why the refund of marriage gratuities arises?—That can arise when a lady who has got married becomes a widow and is taken back again into the Civil Service. It is a condition of her being given full credit for pension rights that she should repay the gratuity awarded on marriage.

It does not mean that you discovered bigamies, or anything like that?—No.

Chairman.—How many widows were reinstated during the year?—I shall have to look into that and give you a note.*

28. I notice at the top of page 40 that the amount received from local authorities under sections 82 and 84 of the Local Government (Superannuation), 1948, is more than double the estimate. Is there any difficulty in estimating more accurately? — There is, of course, the normal difficulty of assessing when retirements, resignations and so on will take place.

What, in particular, does this cover? What is the receipt in respect of it?

Deputy Bartley.—Has it anything to do with officers who have been in the service of local authorities and have transferred, or vice versa?

Mr. Whitaker.—Might I send a short note on it?*

Chairman.—Yes. If there are no further questions we will pass to the next Vote.

VOTE 18—SECRET SERVICE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 19—EXPENSES UNDER THE ELECTORAL ACT AND THE JURIES ACT.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 20—SUPPLEMENTARY AGRICULTURAL GRANTS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

29. Chairman.—On what basis exactly are the grants under subhead D.—Additional Grant under the Rates on Agricultural Land (Relief) Acts, 1946 and 1953— distributed? There are a number of grants here?—You will see from subheads A., B. and C. that the grants are fixed by various Local Government (Rates on Agricultural Land) Acts. Subhead D., although fixed by statute, varies in relation to the rates. The grant used consist of three categories of allowances: (1) primary allowances; (2) supplementary allowances and (3) employment allowances. The primary allowance is static. It applies to valuations up to £20 and the first £20 of higher valuations and is three-fifths of the general rate struck in the area. The other allowance depends on employment. There was a supplementary allowance which applied to the part of the valuation over £20 and was one-fifth of the general rate.

30. Deputy Sheldon.—It is extinguished now, is it not?—That was abolished. The primary allowance is in relation to the rate struck by the county councils and the employment allowance is determined by the number and amount of claims made before the statutory date, which is a date in October of the year of account.

31. Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—Is it possible to have a breakdown of the expenditure under each subhead?—Do you mean dividing it into the different categories?

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—Yes.

Chairman.—The best way to get that information would be by way of a Parliamentary Question.

VOTE 21—LAW CHARGES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

32. Chairman.—Subhead E.—Defence of Public Servants—what kind of trouble did this arise from? — In general, it arises through actions taken against public officials for acts done by them in the execution of their duty. They are mostly taken against members of the Garda Síochána for alleged excess of their duties. Gardaí are in closer contact with the general public than other officials.

VOTE 22—UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

33. Chairman.—I notice the Estimates give statutory authority for certain grants in relation to colleges but not for others. Is there, in fact, statutory authority for the other grants?—Even where there is not an express statutory authority, the grants acquire statutory sanction by being voted and then authorised by the Appropriation Act.

Would it not be better to put them on a statutory basis rather than have them voted each year? — I think the main objection to doing that is that some of these grants are temporary in character. Where they become permanent, of course, there is a case for putting them in a permanent specific statute.

VOTE 23—MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

34. Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll. — Subhead E. refers to the Irish Plate. What is that?—It is a race run at the October-November meeting at the Curragh.

35. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to this group, is there any particular reason why the Vote for An Chomhairle Ealaíon could not be included here and thus save a separate Vote for it? Would it not help to tidy up the Book of Estimates if the grant for the Chomhairle Ealaíon were included under this heading of Grants to Societies, Etc.?—Probably this happened because it was thought fit to introduce a separate Estimate for the Chomhairle Ealaíon when it was first formed.

36. Deputy Mrs. Crowley.—Subhead G. relates to Compensation and other Payments in connection with Injuries to Property. Who is entitled to compensation? —This is compensation that arose out of damage to property caused by the bombs dropped on the North Strand and elsewhere during the war years. The entitlement to compensation is regulated by statutory instrument.

37. Chairman.—Subhead I. relates to the Derrynane Trust, Limited. What is the condition attaching to payment of this Grant-in-Aid?—The basic condition is that the State has undertaken to provide £4 for every £1 publicly subscribed, subject to a maximum State contribution of £5,000. This £2,000 grant was made pursuant to that undertaking. In fact, the remaining £3,000 was provided in last year’s Estimate.

Have they any conditions attaching to the Grant-in-Aid such as what condition the place would be kept in, and so forth? —The grant is made to a Trust which was set up to do the work necessary to preserve the Abbey—not as a national monument, which it is not, but as a quasinational monument, owned by the Trust.

VOTE 65—OIFIG NA GAELTACHTA AGUS NA gCEANTAR gCUNG.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

38. Deputy Bartley.—Subhead A. relates to Salaries, Wages and Allowances. The note says that inter alia the saving is due to vacancies. How many vacancies were involved?—I notice from the Estimates for 1955-56 that there were five heads of staff in that year as against a prospective eight in 1954-55. Possibly there were three vacancies during 1954-55.

39. Chairman.—Is it not quite possible that this Office will be absorbed in the new Department?—I am afraid I have not any information about that.

VOTE 68—REMUNERATION.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

40. Deputy Bartley.—This Vote disappears after the year 1954-55, does it not?—Yes. It was a specific Vote.

Chairman.—For a five month period?— For a five month period, yes.

I presume this is the total cost of the increase for the five month period?—Yes.

VOTE 69—REPAYMENTS TO CONTINGENCY FUND.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

41. Chairman.—I notice in the Deposit Account that the stamp duty remitted or refunded on deeds and other instruments for representatives in Ireland of external Governments seems large. Were there special items or do we get, say, reciprocity for our representatives abroad?— Yes, there is reciprocity. Variations, of course, in the account are accidental, depending on what particular transactions are going through.

VOTE 70—NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

42. Chairman.—On this Vote there is the following note by the Comptroller and Auditor General, which is at paragraph 115 of the Report:—

“115. Pursuant to Section 3 of the National Development Fund Act, 1954 (No. 7 of 1954), a sum of £3,000,000 provided in this Vote was paid into the Fund established by section 2 of the Act. Including £5,000,000 paid in the year 1953-54, the total payments into the Fund to 31 March, 1955, amounted to £8,000,000. Issues in the year under review totalled £1,811,352, viz.:—

The various projects financed from these issues, and the expenditure incurred, are indicated in the statements appended to the accounts of the relevant Votes.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—No. It is for information.

43. Chairman. — What is the latest account of this fund presented to the Oireachtas?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—We have completed the audit of the 1954-55 account. If it is not yet presented, I am sure it is in course of printing.

Chairman.—Thank you very much, Mr. Whitaker.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 7—OFFICE OF THE REVENUE COMMISSIONERS.

Mr. R. P. Rice called and examined.

44. Chairman.—On this Vote there are notes by the Comptroller and Auditor General at paragraphs 6 to 9 inclusive, of the Report, which read as follows:—

“Revenue Account.

6. A test examination of the Revenue Account has been carried out with satisfactory results.

7. The net yield of revenue for the years 1953-54 and 1954-55, under its main heads, is shown in the following statement:—

£85,110,000 was paid into the Exchequer during the year leaving a balance of £2,110,787 outstanding as compared with £2,078,293 at the end of the previous financial year.

I have been furnished with the following statement of outstanding taxes:—

Extra-statutory Repayments of Customs and Excise Duties.

8. Extra-statutory repayments of Customs duties and of Excise duties amounting to £10,510 and £1,111, respectively, were made during the year.

Remissions and Amounts Irrecoverable.

9. I have been furnished with schedules of the cases involving a loss of £50 or upwards in which claims for duty under the Revenue Acts were remitted without statutory authority or passed as irrecoverable during the year ended 31 March, 1955. I have made a test examination of the items included in the schedules with satisfactory results. The total amount, £73,515, remitted or passed as irrecoverable was made up as follows:—

The distribution according to the grounds of remission or write-off was:—

45. In regard to paragraph 7, under what head of revenue is betting duty brought to account?—Excise.

How are the duties collected?—Each bookmaker has to be licensed. There are arrangements with us whereby he keeps sheets and records of all the bets that he takes. On the sheets are recorded particulars of bets and each week an account is taken by us of the levy on the bets and the amount is paid to the Accountant General, or to the collector of Customs who covers the area.

Deputy Sheldon.—Does that mean that an official goes around to each bookmaker’s establishment to check these?— We have constant checks to see that the records are kept in accordance with the regulations that we make.

46. Chairman.—Do you have any cases of evasions?—We do, but not many. Perhaps we go into court four or five times a year. If they want to evade, instead of recording a 20/- bet they might record a 5/- bet. The main thing that we test through our officers is that the right bet is recorded on the sheets.

47. Do you prosecute in all cases?—We prosecute in most cases. There may be settlements, if the case is not a bad case. There might be some first offender. There might be alleviating circumstances. Normally we prosecute.

48. In paragraph 7 there is a statement of outstanding taxes. It is a new feature. I see that, taking income tax and surtax arrears, the amount goes over £14,000,000. That would represent roughly half the year’s collection? — of income tax, it would—roughly half—taking in corporation profits tax, it might.

It seems to be high?—Very high, yes. Would you like me to tell you something about it?

49. Deputy Bartley. — Before you do that there is one matter on which we might get some information. Making a rough calculation for the year previous to the accounting year in question, 1953-54, I compute that about £4,500,000 of these combined taxes are outstanding. That would represent, say, about 20 per cent. of the total. Can that be taken as a representative figure of arrears in any year?

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—As a normal figure for each year?

Deputy Bartley.—Yes. Is it in or about a normal figure—20 per cent.?

Deputy Mrs. O’Carroll.—Of the total amount to be collected?

Deputy Bartley.—Of the three yields— income tax, surtax and super tax?

Mr. Rice.—I am sorry, Deputy. I just missed the point of the question.

Deputy Bartley. — I am making out that, for 1953-54, the outstanding taxes would amount to about 20 per cent. of the total collectible. My figures are not exactly correct but they are roughly accurate. I think it would be about 20 per cent. Is 20 per cent. a normal figure of outstanding taxes? Let me put it this way —there is not a big variation this year as compared with other years?—For the year 1953-54, no.

50. Deputy Sheldon. — Mr. Rice was going to tell us something about the £14,000,000.

Mr. Rice. — The Chairman mentioned that they were very high. The arrears cover all years right up to 1953-54, and what we have had to do in many cases, and especially in big cases, was to make what we call protective assessments. We have got to be sure that the assessments we make cover the full liability which often cannot be determined for a period of years. Perhaps I can illustrate by referring to one of these cases. In that case alone, there is a sum of over £1,000,000 tax included in the figures, of which roughly about £850,000 is income-tax and a couple of hundred thousand pounds sur-tax. At the present time we have received all the payments that we think we are going to get in that particular case, but the estate is a very big estate; it is not wound up. It will take years before all the assets and sources of income are explored. But, as regards that particular case, in which there is something about £1,000,000 outstanding, we feel we will get nothing more. We have got to keep on the right side. The case I mentioned was a peculiarly big case and we consider that the bulk of the outstanding tax will be discharged. If the members would look at the Table in the Report, they would find that in respect of Income Tax other than for Dublin General (Schedule E) the sum of £9,741,000 is outstanding. We have gone forward a year ourselves in our own records. Since this figure was compiled, we have collected roughly £840,000. We have discharged roughly about £2,000,000 —in fact, £1.86 million. At the present time, there is only £7,000,000 outstanding in the records and of that £7,000,000 we think we are only going to get £1.4 million roughly. The £5.6 million left out includes the £850,000 for the big case I spoke of. In cases where liability has not been properly ascertained or where we think a correct liability has not been paid, we made additional assessments to make sure that we will not be out of date. If you look at the second column of the £9.7 million there is roughly £7.0 million outstanding at the present day, and we think there is about £1.4 million of this still to be collected. Of the £9,741,000, there was about £2.2 million to be collected, of which we have collected over £8 million. The figures that you see there do not cover collectible arrears; they cover all the amounts outstanding in our assessments. The case I spoke of will not be settled next year because it is a large estate and will take a long time still to settle. We cannot discharge anything until the matter is finally completed.

51. Deputy Bartley.—I see in column 1 in respect of 1948-49 and earlier years that the Revenue Commissioners never let up.

Deputy Sheldon.—They are not statute barred. In effect, Mr. Rice, even though the Commissioners are not statute barred, do they not have some regard to that?

Mr. Rice.—Yes, but in the event of an ordinary case where something trifling is involved, we would not go back. We only go back because we have got to protect the Revenue when we think there is evasion of some kind. Then we can go back to 1922 or 1923 but we very rarely go back that far now.

52. Chairman.—How, for instance, are new cases brought to light? Take the case of a new business or some new development, how are these brought to light?— Theoretically, it works this way. We examine directories, etc., and when a business property is sold, we watch to see who is taking on the new business. In fact, some of the arrears in question are due to cases where a man starts a business and does not give accounts for a period of time. We make estimated assessments to cover his liability. Sometimes when we get the accounts, he may have been overcharged or have become bankrupt or made losses. That piles up the figures.

53. With regard to paragraph 8, how do the extra-statutory repayments of Customs and Excise duties arise? — The bulk of that is covered by diplomatic concessions. All over the world diplomats and their staffs do not pay the ordinary Customs duties on spirits, petrol and tobacco, etc. We are not alone in that respect. It is the procedure all over the civilised world. A record is kept of the various things on which we repay the duty.

Deputy Bartley.—These two payments are payments by the Revenue Commissioners?—Yes. They are repayments.

Chairman.—It shows an increase compared with previous occasions?—It does.

54. In the table on paragraph 9, I notice there are remissions in two very large cases of £57,000 odd. In what circumstances do the Commissioners, in fact, agree to the remissions? — One of these cases alone was £57,788 and the circumstances in respect of that case were this. Somebody died who had not lived in this country but, through some technical application of the law, was claimed to be domiciled here. It was purely a technical domicile. There were no assets here of any kind. In other words, it was not necessary to take out probate in this country. The assets were outside and the beneficiaries took the assets under the process of the ordinary courts outside the country. Because of the technical position that one of the beneficiaries was domiciled here and was getting some benefit from the estate, there was legally a liability for legacy duty. We had no means of recovery. Finally, after protracted correspondence we were offered a sum. The original claim was for £67,000 and we were offered a sum of £10,000 to close the matter. We had no practical means of recovering anything. The other case was a small, technical one. A man created several life interests in his lifetime and wanted to give something to his niece. In fact, he did it in such a complicated way that he laid a very big liability on the niece who was getting the property. We accepted what would have been the correct liability if the thing had been done properly.

55. With regard to subhead M.—Law Charges, Expenses of Prosecutions, Fees, Rewards, etc. — what happened in the case referred to?—It is a case we won in the High Court. It was a very important case of death duties. It also hinged on whether the deceased died domiciled in this country. That went to the High Court and we won it in the High Court. We thought we would win it in the Supreme Court and framed our Estimates accordingly. We lost the case in the Supreme Court. There was a very large sum of money involved. The case was a very protracted one. The costs were awarded against us.

56. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to subhead O.—Provision of Rooms for Official Purposes — what is behind the lower expenditure in regard to the hire of rooms for income tax appeals?—That is purely incidental. Sometimes these payments are made in arrears. This year the Customs officers did not have to get rooms.

57. Chairman. — On subhead R.— Customs Co-operation Council—what are the aims of this Council?—The aims of this Council are to standardise procedure as far as possible and to ease difficulties for the traders who, on the one hand, want to sell goods in other countries and, on the other hand, for those who want to buy. Troubles arise, for example, as to what is the correct way of valuing goods coming in and representatives of various countries sit round the table and endeavour to work out something that is fair and that each country will consider fair in relation to values. Also—perhaps I might describe it this way—a man here wants to sell goods in France. France has tariffs with various names and he wants to be able to tell his customers in France: “You are under such-and-such a heading of French tariff.” The idea is to simplify procedure in various countries so that a man, before effecting a bargain, will know exactly under what heading it comes. In the past a trader might have sold goods thinking there was no duty on them in the belief that they came under a certain import description. When the goods were imported into the other country they might hare been found to come under another heading. The whole idea is to help European trade. In due course they are hoping, I think, to get non-European countries to come in and co-operate as well.

58. On subhead S., the details of Appropriations in Aid are on page 13, and on item 3, clerical services and incidental expenses on account of General Lighthouse Fund, what are your functions in this connection?—There is a levy payable to the people in London who run all the lighthouses. We collect the money from the ships coming into our ports. We have a certain amount of work in connection with it and we measure the cost of that work at about £275.

59. Deputy Sheldon.—In the Miscellaneous Items there is an item, Vote Refunds, £272. What are Vote Refunds? —They are uncashed pay orders, mainly.

60. Chairman.—Extra receipts payable to Exchequer. The notes are on page 14.

Deputy Sheldon.—The first of the notes starts off with Exchequer Extra Receipts. That surely is not quite right?—No, but I think you asked us for that. I think we never had that, Deputy, until you asked us to put it in some years ago.

The details, yes, Mr. Rice, but not under that heading. It is a bit confusing because these are fee stamps and I think putting that heading in makes it confusing with extra receipts payable to the Exchequer as given under that heading. It is only the heading not the details that I was querying. They are not really extra receipts; they are fee stamps?—I thought we were doing what you wanted us to do.

What I am querying is the title that is given to the Item. That is all. I think those words could be left out. There is no advantage in using them and they are possibly misleading?—Very good.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—It would probably be better to omit the words “Exchequer Extra Receipts”.

Mr. Rice.—Very good, Deputy, we will take a note of that.

Chairman.—Thank you, Mr. Rice.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix IV.

* See Appendix V.

* See Appendix V.

* This covers Schedule E tax for Dublin General as from 1950-51. For earlier years the Schedule E tax for Dublin General is included in the figures in column (3).