Re: Finance Bill: PAYE Credit for Proprietary Directors: What does this statement mea
I was looking at this today in the Sunday Business Post. I may be corrected on this but I don't believe that this has anything to do with the PAYE credit being extended to proprietory directors but credit for PAYE paid.
The explanatory memorandum to the Finance Bill 2010 says:-
"Section 7 amends section 997A to ensure that, in the case of a
proprietary director, the credit for PAYE tax remitted cannot exceed
the PAYE tax actually deducted from his or her directorship
emoluments"
Section 997A itself of the TCA 1997 says :-
"997A Credit in respect of tax deducted from emoluments of certain directors
Summary
Certain directors of companies, that is, those with “material interest” in the company
will not be given credit for PAYE tax deducted from payments made to them by the
company unless there is documentary evidence that the tax has been remitted to the Collector-
General."
I believe that what is intended is that a proprietory director cannot get credit for PAYE tax deducted from them unless the company, of which they are a proprietory director has actually paid the relevant tax over to Revenue.
Take the case of a prop. dir. who has, say, €5,000 PAYE tax deducted on his P60. Say, he has overpaid €1,000 for the year through medical expenses or other claims. I think that what they are getting at is he will not get the refund of the €1,000 unless the actual PAYE of €5,000 has been paid over by his company to Revenue and is documented as paid. Otherwise he could get a refund on tax which has not yet been paid over by his company to Revenue. Very relevant in these challenging times.
Separately on the matter of the PAYE credit itself, of course a prop. dir would be entitled to the PAYE credit if they had a non-proprietory position with sufficient income to justify granting it, e.g. another PAYE employment with an unconnected business or a state pension etc. and in that case the PAYE credit would be granted to it's full value or such lower amount as covers the relevant income.
I may be off on this but that's my reading of it.