Tax take to end of May up 3.6% on same time last year

Taxes collected by the State rose by 3.6% in the first five months of the year to €36.4bn, according to latest Exchequer Returns from the Department of Finance.
When some funds from iPhone-maker Apple, which was forced to pay back taxes as part of settlement of up to €14bn to Ireland are included, the amount of tax collected was up 8.5%.
Income tax, a key indicator of the health of the economy, was up by 4.5%, while VAT rose 5.5%.
Corporation tax, including funds from Apple, was up 18% in the first five months of the year.
However, if the Apple money is excluded, corporation tax is down 9.4% on the same period last year.
Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe said the drop was driven by one-off factors last year.
But he added: "It nonetheless highlights the degree of concentration in the corporate tax base, where a small number of multinational firms can significantly impact on the overall tax yield."
The figures also show Government spending was up 8% in the first five months of the year to €42bn which was close to its target.
There was an exchequer surplus of €4bn in the five months to the end of May.
But excluding the money from Apple the surplus was €700m.
Minister Donohoe said: "May is one of the most important months for tax revenues and the steady growth in most tax headings points to an economy that is in a in a relatively good position."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Irish Times

14 hours ago

• Irish Times

Does Ireland's hospitality sector really need a VAT cut?

Tánaiste Simon Harris may yet come to regret the elevation of a manifesto commitment to cut the rate of VAT charged on hospitality to the level of 'solemn promise' as he did this week at the National Economic Dialogue. Manifesto commitments can be discarded quite easily, especially when part of a coalition. Solemn promises not so much. The already tenuous argument for promoting the needs of the hospitality sector over all the other Budget Day supplicants can only get weaker as the summer unfolds and the twin threats to the global economy of Donald Trump's tariffs and the conflict between Israel and Iran unfold. The idea is strenuously opposed by the Department of Finance which came out against it in the run-up to last year's budget. Officials noted that it represented an 'enormous fiscal transfer of taxpayers' money to the sector which the evidence available at present does not support'. READ MORE Their opposition is unlikely to waver this time around. The central plank of their argument – that employment and prices in the sector are growing strongly despite a number of high-profile restaurant closures – remains robust. The Labour Force Survey for the first quarter of the year was published last month. It showed that the numbers working in accommodation and food services activity – which is seen as the relevant category for hospitality – reached 186,000, up almost 7 per cent on the first quarter of 2024. The most recent inflation figures – for last May – show that restaurant and hotel prices are rising faster than prices in the economy as a whole. They rose by 2.8 per cent over the past 12 months compared with 1.7 per cent for the consumer price index overall. The department will no doubt point to the continuation of the trend of rising employment levels and falling prices in the sector despite the levying of the standard VAT rate when the issue comes up for discussion over the summer But the indications are that their entreaties will fall on deaf ears and the Government will be swayed by industry lobbying rather than hard facts at a cost of €790 million to taxpayers.

Irish Independent

18 hours ago

• Irish Independent

AIB likely to quadruple chief executive Colin Hunt's pay package to €2m after government exit

The sale of the State's final 2.06pc stake has freed the bank from the Government-imposed salary cap on banker pay. It is likely that AIB will look to bump up Hunt's pay – and also add in a equivalent share allowance to at least match that of Bank of Ireland CEO Myles O'Grady. O'Grady is paid a basic rate of €950,000 before his pension or bonus at Bank of Ireland, which divested from State ownership in 2022. That compares to the €500,000 basic wage that his AIB counterpart receives. After pension and bonuses are included, Hunt is currently paid just over €600,000 a year. 'To be fair, a salary of €500,000 for the CEO of the largest bank in Ireland is not competitive. It's well below market rate,' said banking analyst John Cronin of SeaPoint Insights. 'Bank of Ireland pays Myles O'Grady €950k and it pays CFO Mark Spain €600k. So I would say that the CEO and CFO of AIB will go to those levels at least pretty quickly. It's hard for the general public to get their heads around pay packages above €500k "They'll probably keep CEO pay just below €1m. It'd be a surprise if they didn't match Bank of Ireland, and they might go around €25,000 more,' he said. Now that the Government has sold its stake and the salary cap at the bank has been removed, industry sources believe AIB is also likely to add a lucrative fixed share allowance to Hunt's package – effectively matching O'Grady's deal. Bank of Ireland's top executives currently get a fixed share allowance of 50pc of salary, introduced after the State sold its final shares in the bank in 2022. That fixed share allowance is expected to rise to 100pc next year. ​'It's hard for the general public to get their heads around pay packages above five hundred grand and why a CEO has to be paid a million,' admitted another industry source, adding that Hunt was seen as unlikely to seek work with banks in London or elsewhere. 'I'd think he would probably attach a huge amount of value to living here, from a family point of view. He's also in the middle of every significant macroeconomic debate in Ireland because of his position – and I wouldn't underestimate the value he attaches to that. 'But if you want to hang on to that management team and keep them together, then you have to compete in the marketplace. And now they have the freedom to compete. "It would be kind of dysfunctional to have a banking market where one big bank can pay double what the other big bank pays, when they're more or less doing the exact same thing,' said the source. Cronin feels the pay cap should never have been introduced. 'I get that it worked politically. But you have to pay people properly to do a job. They could move to another smaller bank and get paid twice the amount and more. The danger is you get runaway cost-inflation across the sector "There is no doubt shareholders saw an ongoing retention risk in relation to the management team and they were not happy about that.' Cronin said bankers are disappointed that Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe did not remove the ban on variable performance-related bonuses above €20,000. 'My own view is that he should, but I can totally understand why he didn't. The danger is you get runaway cost-inflation across the sector. 'But the problem is that it creates cynicism within the sector, where people say that it's OK for the top guys to get paid properly, but not everyone else. And it can drive fixed-pay inflation, which is less ideal from a cost flexibility standpoint.'

The Journal

18 hours ago

• The Journal

Never mind the spin - Ireland isn't close to ‘breakeven' on the €21 billion AIB bailout

Paul O'Donoghue GOOD NEWS – WE'RE up on our big investment! 'What investment?' you cry. Why, the Great Bank Bailout investment, of course! You see, during the week the state sold its final shareholding in AIB. It was once assumed that a lot of the cash poured into the lender was a sunk cost. It turns out, that isn't the case. The government said during the week that, once everything is factored in, AIB will come extremely close to repaying its bailout. Some €20.8 billion was put into the lender during the financial crisis. The government so far has gotten back €19.8 billion. Eventually, the total recovered amount will likely rise to just over €20 billion. Multiple media outlets reported during the week that AIB will end up about '€700 million shy' of repaying the state. Essentially, coming very close to breakeven. This is based on calculations provided by the Department of Finance. The department said when you look at the bailout money collectively put into AIB, Bank of Ireland (BOI) and PTSB, 'the state is €0.6 billion above break-even on its €29.4 billion investment'. All of that sounds great. But it doesn't give the full picture. Here's why. A LUAS tram passes in front of AIB headquarters. Alamy Stock Photo Alamy Stock Photo The debt To cut a long story short – the government's figures don't take debt servicing costs into account. When the Irish state poured €29.4 billion into those AIB/BOI/PTSB during the financial crisis, it borrowed money to do so. This debt costs money to service – quite a bit. Let's start with AIB. As stated, the AIB bailout cost was €20.8 billion. The Comptroller and Auditor General (basically the state spending watchdog) previously estimated that, as of the end of 2021, debt servicing costs on the AIB bailout amounted to €7.1 billion. That amount is on top of the €20.8 billion – so straight away, the actual AIB bailout cost goes to €27.9 billion. And interest is still being paid on that money. In a statement to The Journal , the organisation said the report, published in 2022, 'is the most recent report the C&AG has published on this issue'. But as some interest would still have racked up between 2022 and now, it's likely the final AIB bailout cost, when debt servicing is included, is well above €28 billion. With this in mind, we asked the Department of Finance how taxpayers are €0.6 billion 'up' on the AIB/BOI/PTSB bailouts. A spokesman said: 'The figures are based on a simple cash in, cash out basis. We have never included debt servicing costs over the last 10 years of tracking these figures.' Advertisement Asked why debt servicing costs are not included, the spokesperson said: 'It [the Department] doesn't include debt servicing costs, which are under the remit of the NTMA'. The NTMA (National Treasury Management Agency) is the Irish agency which manages the state's assets. Let's think about that for a minute. The Department of Finance doesn't include the billions in debt servicing costs – which are real costs – because counting this is handled by a different state agency. Does that sound like a good reason to ignore billions in taxpayer funds spent? It would be one thing if profit and loss wasn't mentioned at all. But by saying taxpayers are actually in profit on the AIB/BOI/PTSB bailout, the Department's claims paint a misleading picture. Let's take a quick look at debt servicing costs for the three main banks. As of end 2021, the most recent figures available: AIB: €7.1 billion BOI: €0.7 billion PTSB: €0.7 billion That's an additional €8.5 billion. So rather than taxpayers being '€0.6 billion above break-even', we'd actually be about €8 billion down. Not even counting the additional debt costs paid since the end of 2021. It's also telling how the Department chose to highlight the 'investment' into AIB, Bank of Ireland and PTSB. It didn't mention the other two lenders we bailed out 'invested' in at the same time. This pair, of course, was Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide (INBS). Between them, they received bailout funds of €34.5 billion. The state has recovered about €1.1 billion of that amount. The remaining €33.4 billion is officially deemed an 'unrecoverable sunk cost'. Anglo and INBS were merged into a new state-owned entity called the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (IBRC), which is trying to get anything it can back for taxpayers. So it's perhaps understandable why the Department would prefer to forget about these two when talking about how well we are doing on our banking 'investment'. Let's do a quick rundown of where things actually stand when looking at the Irish state's banking 'investments' – when including debt servicing costs. AIB – loss for the state. Likely in the region of €8 billion BOI – profit. Approximately €1.4 billion PTSB – state still holds 57% stake, currently valued at €600 million. State will likely finish at a loss of about €1 billion. Possibly less, depending on how much it ultimately sells the shares for. IBRC – loss. Likely in the region of €35 – €40 billion once all costs are included. Briefly returning to AIB. Seeing as the Department of Finance consistently refers to the bank bailouts as 'investments', it's worth briefly considering them as such. If someone invests €20.8 billion in 2010, and receives a payout of say €20.8 billion in 2025, how did they fare? Well, you *could* say they broke even, on a 'cash in, cash out' basis. But in reality, they lost money due to inflation. €20.8 billion in 2010 is worth the same as about €27 billion in today's money. And that's on top of… something… oh yeah, billions in debt servicing costs! How do we keep forgetting those pesky charges? When the government continuously forgets them as well, it can be hard to remember! We're down billions None of this is necessarily to say that bailing out the banks was the wrong move. The Irish state got something valuable for the AIB bailout. It ensured one of the country's main lenders didn't collapse. It also got a decent amount of the bailout money back in the end. At least, from AIB, PTSB and BOI. Likely a good bit more than was expected during the crash. That's all fine. So why can't the government be happy with that, rather than trying to spin that we are around 'breakeven' on our AIB 'investment'? To its credit, AIB's statement on its return to private ownership didn't make any mention of the state's 'return on investment'. So if AIB hasn't tried to claim this, why has the government? Put simply – the government is trying to spin that taxpayers got a return on the bank bailouts. Three of them, at least. But we didn't. Even on those selectively-chosen three bailouts, we're down billions and billions of euro. When the government is trying to rewrite history, it should be called out for it. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal