2026-06-25

1. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if there will be any public consultation prior to the launch of the savings and investment account scheme. [48238/26]

4. Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will provide an update on the proposed savings and investment account; the precise details of the scheme, including its design and proposed taxation treatment; and the timeline for publication of those details and for the production of any required legislation. [48371/26]

The Minister’s Department led a forum for stakeholders for representative bodies and policymakers in relation to the savings and investment accounts scheme under design. These voices, no doubt, have a role to play and a place in the discussion. A scheme of this scope, however, would traditionally have had a public consultation process, and that was not the case here. What engagement has there been with the public? What research has been done by the Minister or his Department on public views of how to design a savings and investment accounts scheme?

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 4 together. I thank Deputy Doherty for his question. An Teachta O'Flynn also has a question. Ireland still does not have a sufficiently diversified savings and investment culture. This is something we largely agree on. Too much of people’s hard-earned savings remains in low-yield deposits, where inflation can erode value over time. Deposit accounts are right for many people and for many needs but they cannot be the only practical option that we have available for many. Investment in capital markets can offer households another path to long-term financial well-being, while also supporting growth and competitiveness in the wider economy. In recognition of the importance of encouraging retail investment, the last budget provided for a reduction in the rate of taxation on returns from Irish and equivalent investment funds and Irish and certain foreign life assurance policies from 41% to 38%. That budget, however, also included a commitment to publish a roadmap for the taxation of retail investment, and set out an approach to simplify and adapt the tax framework to further support retail investment in Ireland. This arose from a key finding in the funds sector report 2030, which included an extensive public consultation. The starting point for this process, then, was that report. The funds review was then included as established Government policy and set out in the programme for Government. There has been extensive public outreach on the proposed investment account policy. On 31 March, at the first annual savings and investment forum, I announced that my Department is currently working on the development of an investment account. This forum brought together key stakeholders from across the financial services sector, policymakers and, importantly, consumer representatives, including the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, to support the continued evolution of Ireland’s investment landscape. Together with the Minister of State, Deputy Troy, I recently convened a representative cross-section of the funds and asset management sector. I also convened a consumer round table, which I think was this week, to discuss plans for the introduction of a new investment account. I and my officials have held over 30 meetings to date in relation to the proposed investment account. These have included meetings with financial services firms, consumer representatives, the European Commission and other member states and jurisdictions which offer such accounts. Officials in my Department are currently developing policy options regarding the investment account framework which will form part of the deliberations for budget 2027. The aim is to legislate for the framework in 2026 and to allow accounts to be offered from 2027. I say sincerely to Deputy Doherty and all the Deputies in the House that if there are other people who wish to feed into this process and who feel they have not had that opportunity, I ask them to please come forward. We have had extensive engagement. This has already been an elongated process. There was the public consultation as part of the funds review but we are very happy to hear from as many diverse voices as possible. While there has not been a formal public consultation process at this stage, and I take the Deputy’s point, I am very happy to hear any further views that are required for that we could benefit from to feed into the process.

The Tánaiste is right in saying there has not been a public consultation in relation to this issue. The funds review was separate. It looked at the taxation aspect but did not argue for this type of savings and investment scheme.

Sure.

That was not the consultation that was under review at that time. To tell the Minister the God’s honest truth, we know very little because we are still in the dark in relation to what this scheme is going to look like. We are told it is going to be announced on budget day. There has been no consultation with the public. There has been consultation with stakeholders, other groups, with very wealthy asset managers and so on. The Minister has had extensive meetings with asset managers, wealth managers, financial planners, digital platforms, banks and insurance firms but there has been no real engagement with the public. This is concerning, given that this is going to be a major scheme that will impact the public. We know from media reports that, for example, the largest asset management firm in the world, BlackRock, has had extensive meetings with the Department and Ministers. That type of extensive lobbying behind the scenes by some of the largest financial companies in the world raises legitimate questions about whether the public interest is being served. Why has there been no time for a public consultation when discussions have been going on behind closed doors with powerful financial interests for three years now, as we have learned from media reports?

I thank the Tánaiste for his reply to both of us. I appreciate what the Tánaiste is saying. He has had 30 meetings, as he said. There are questions to be answered, however. While I agree with and welcome the entire scheme as it is important to get people, especially younger people saving and into that routine, it does need to be thrashed out by the Oireachtas. I suspect we may need legislation on it. The questions I want to put to the Tánaiste, and I think these are the questions on everybody’s lips, are: what exact tax rate and threshold will apply to this scheme and will the deemed disposal rule be scrapped? I think the deemed disposal rule is very unfair double taxation. I do not think we have had enough conversation around this aspect. If there has been a conversation around it, it certainly has not been published in respect of the 30 meetings behind closed doors. I am not being facetious in saying that. We then have to look at the existing investors who have already put their moneys away, and whether tax penalties will apply to them and, if so, what they will be. There is also the question of whether the scheme will be open to investors who have existing accounts to move over to. I ask the Tánaiste to seriously look at what is done in the United Kingdom and how that tax system works very well to get people to open such accounts. I say this because I suspect we may have a problem if we just go with the old system of deemed disposal. It is not going to work and people are going to run away from it.

I reject the assertion that the meetings take place behind closed doors. They are just meetings, the door is closed, but there are lots of people in the room. We have had meetings with the Central Bank, the European Commission, and the CCPC. That was a very public event and people will be well aware of it because it was covered widely in the media. I do, however, take the point about getting this scheme right. I will make a few points. Obviously, this will definitely require legislation. The intention is to legislate for this in the finance Bill. There will, therefore, be ample time to properly scrutinise this proposal and, indeed, for the Deputy to have an input. I think that is important. I take the point as well, although I disagree with it, in terms of how much we know about the scheme now. I would argue that we actually know more about this proposal now than we know about most budgetary measures because the budget last year gave a commitment to consult and engage on rates of taxation. Finalising issues in respect of rates of tax and amounts that might be tax free are, as all Deputies will know, matters for a budget day. By the way, I am happy, at an appropriate point in advance of the budget, to provide a briefing to the Opposition on our thinking on this scheme. We will have different views on this issue but I do hope we can fundamentally agree with the idea that we should be offering a variety of ways for people to save and invest. As Deputy Doherty said, we have met with lots of banks and digital platforms because they are the people who we require to provide the accounts. I wanted them to be ready to open accounts in 2027. On the point about broader investment, I agree with Deputy O'Flynn on this point. This is not an either-or situation. I passionately believe that we need personal investment accounts in Ireland like they have in lots of other European countries. This is not my idea. Many other countries have already done this, and my view is that we need to get on board. That will not, however, be enough in and of itself. There are anomalies in the taxation system, and I think deemed disposal is one. Again, all these issues are matters for budget day. Reducing the deemed disposal taxation rate from 41% to 38% misses the broader point, which is whether this measure is fulfilling the policy objective it was intended to fulfil. I am not so sure it is. If there is a need for anti-avoidance measures, is deemed disposal the correct way to go about it? I am not convinced it is, by the way. Do we have a better way, as an Oireachtas, to overhaul this provision? On the specific example of the UK, I met the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what the UK is doing. I also met Swedish representatives on what that country has done, and representatives from a number of other countries.

We have discussed deemed disposal and how that could be changed, making sure it does not just benefit the ultra-rich and allow for the avoidance of tax on significant assets. There is a real question in relation to the public scrutiny of what is going on. The Minister said we know a lot but, in fairness, we do not. We do not know what the thresholds are going to be. We do not know what the rate is going to be. We do not know if there is going to be tax inside the investment. We do not know if it is going to be for investments in Ireland or investments internationally. There is a lot we do not know and there has been no public consultation. There is no opportunity for the public to actually formally feed in their views in relation to this proposal. From the very start, we have said this scheme needs to meet two criteria. It needs to work for ordinary people. It cannot be a way for the rich to avoid tax and, effectively, get a tax cut. It also needs to have a public investment aspect. There are also, however, serious risks. The Central Bank warned about the bubble in artificial intelligence, AI, and inflated values in relation to some of the products in that area. Investment is not for everybody. Investment contains risks, so there are serious questions in relation to how this scheme will be designed and implemented, and it needs to have proper public scrutiny. I urge the Minister, therefore, to formally open a public consultation process to allow for ordinary people to give their views in relation to what is under consideration.

I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. I appreciate he is going to open consultation with, and have a briefing for, the Opposition. I think there will be a lot of support across the House for that. I again ask the Tánaiste to look at the UK’s individual savings account, ISA, in respect of which a commitment has been given, in the wake of having met the Chancellor of the Exchequer. There is a problem with taxation. At the moment, if a person invests €10,000, for example, and that person is being taxed on it every eight years, then the tax on that investment has already been paid. That is a serious anomaly. If I were a private citizen, I would probably be taking a challenge to the High Court regarding this issue because it does seem to be double or even triple taxation. What we are not taking into account is that the value of investments goes up and down. The other thing we are doing that also needs to be addressed is that if someone is a landlord and has a big mortgage, then they are being taxed on the rent they are receiving. Quite often, those landlords do not receive any of that rent because it is being paid directly to the mortgage lender. We need to close off those doors as well because it is unfair taxation. Very often there are investment plans of 30 years that people have put together because they do not have a pension or a savings fund. I would like a broader conversation about this. I am happy to meet the Minister to give him a couple of ideas. This is not about challenging him; this is about getting the system right and getting people back saving again.

I am happy to be challenged, and I will also be happy to meet because I do want to get this right. I really do because it is important. What we have done is laid out the principles. The details on specific rates of tax and the like would always be a matter for the budget. There is no Minister for Finance who announces tax rates in advance of the budget, as we all know; however, we have already made a number of clear, principled commitments on the design of the account. First, the obligation to ensure the tax is paid would lie with the account provider, not the person who opens the account. That is a game-changer in reducing complexity. Second, there would be an income-free threshold. Third, a person would pay one low flat rate of tax on anything above that threshold. Fourth, on Deputy Doherty's point, because this is not a scheme for the uber-wealthy, there will have to be a maximum amount that can be put into the account, either annually or over the lifetime period. Those are the four principles we have outlined. The Deputy referred to the Central Bank. We are informed on this by the research of the Central Bank. The Central Bank carried out research called Retail Investor Participation in Ireland: Consumer Research and Analysis. It was published only last December. It examined and engaged with Irish households on how they save, invest and engage with financial markets. It shows that Irish households continue to rely heavily on traditional, low-risk saving habits, with 38% of all financial assets held in cash and bank deposits, a level significantly above the EU average. Direct investment in capital markets is very limited. Irish households hold just 2.3% of their financial assets in listed equities and debt securities. The EU average is 7.5%. Irish retail investors also have a very distinct profile. They are more likely to be male and to be between the ages of 35 and 54, and are disproportionately drawn from higher-income, higher-educated ABC1 households. Some 73% are in employment and 65% hold higher education qualifications. Investors tend to be concentrated around the greater Dublin area. Therefore, there is not fair access today to investments. Lower-income people, people outside the Dublin area and women are all less likely to invest than men of a certain age living in a certain part of the country. These are some of the challenges and I look forward to grappling with them.

What about public consultation?

We have had very significant public consultation. I reiterate today that if there is any group or body of groups, or set of individuals, with whom the Deputy would like further engagement, he should please let me know. I will provide him with a list of all the people who have been engaged with. I am also very happy to engage with the Opposition.