LPT: Can revenue put the onus on a tenant to give the owners name PPS no etc?

A

ajapale

Moderator
Messages
7,700
I heard an interview with the Revenue spokeswoman on Radio during the week in which she said something like:

If a tenant has recieved a letter from revenue in relation to LPT because it appears to revenue that he is the owner then the tenant MUST furnish revenue with the name and pps number of the owner. If not renvenue will seek to deduct the amount from the tenant's wages/pension.

I would have thought that it would be enough for the tenant to demonstrate that he is not the owner. Many tenants will not know the name of the individual / company that ownes the property and certainly will not know their personal / company tax details.

Can revenue do this?
 
If the person says they don't own the house and can prove that fact, revenue should then go away and make proper inquiries as to the correct owner.

I doubt the practice would stand up in court.
 
I heard that interview also and was surprised but the official sounded as if she knew what she was on about so odds are she is quoting revenue policy.
 
Given that the Revenue have no clue who the tenant is, what their name is and where they work, this would be difficult to enforce. All the tenant has to do is move out. Seriously, is this the best they can threaten? It's like a dictatorship. If the Revenue contacted my employer and began taking property tax from my salary, I would have no hesitation in suing their asses ... defamation, for one thing. Just because someone sounds like a professional, doesn't mean they can enforce what they are saying. As we should all know by now ...
 
Is there no proper system of registering every property in ireland -Land Registry etc ?
You'd think in this day and age that a few presses of the computer button would reveal ownership of every square inch of land.
 
cl061969 said:
Given that the Revenue have no clue who the tenant is, what their name is and where they work, this would be difficult to enforce. All the tenant has to do is move out. Seriously, is this the best they can threaten? It's like a dictatorship. If the Revenue contacted my employer and began taking property tax from my salary, I would have no hesitation in suing their asses ... defamation, for one thing. Just because someone sounds like a professional, doesn't mean they can enforce what they are saying. As we should all know by now ...
Click to expand...

you should join attack the tax, they would love your way of thinking over there, they don't stand for any reason or legality, they just make it up as they go along.
 
My point was, that the Revenue simply can't issue this charge to anyone simply because it is easiest for them to do so. The charge is for the house-owner, so the house-owner has to pay. Like I said, if the Revenue went to my employer and began instructing them behind my back to deduct a charge is not payable by me I would seriously be outraged by this. They may use this system as a threat to try to force the tenant to tell them who the owner is, but yes, the Land Registry have details of who owns what. As do the TV licence people, as do the refuse collectors, as do the Revenue themselves from the stamp duty payment (if there was one).

I would sit this one out. Write a polite letter explaining in the one line that you write that you don't own the property and suggest that perhaps they could check their records. You can use their line against them that you find it would be a breach of confidence, or dont want to disclose the information for security measures (hee hee).

I would be more worried about how they found out who the tenant is .... Mr. Snowden, can you please help with this?
 
cl061969 said:
Given that the Revenue have no clue who the tenant is, what their name is and where they work, this would be difficult to enforce. All the tenant has to do is move out. Seriously, is this the best they can threaten? It's like a dictatorship. If the Revenue contacted my employer and began taking property tax from my salary, I would have no hesitation in suing their asses ... defamation, for one thing. Just because someone sounds like a professional, doesn't mean they can enforce what they are saying. As we should all know by now ...
Click to expand...


Now that the Revenue have started deducting payments from salaries will you let us know how the defamation case is getting on? Thanks
 
Palerider said:
I heard that interview also and was surprised but the official sounded as if she knew what she was on about so odds are she is quoting revenue policy.
Click to expand...
Yes, I was struck by how authoritative the revenue spokeslady was.

She refused to be deflected when the interviewer (a lightweight) tried to raise a red herring by talking about informers - a related but separate debate.

The revenue spokes lady reiterated that a tenant / occupier who had been written to by revenue in relation to the LPT must furnish them with the owners identity and details. And if this was not done then revenue would proceed to arrange to deduct the amount from the tenant's / occupier's salary or pension.

sahd said:
But - the Revenue have written to the tenant - they know who they are and they will know where they work from income tax records.
The legislation actually states that Revenue don't have to try and prove who the owner is - and that occupation is enough until the occupier can prove thay are not the owners.

"a)the Revenue Commissioners shall not be required firstly to inquire into the ownership of, or title to, any particular residential property, and
(b) all such facts and circumstances relating to the occupation of a residential property by a person as give rise to an inference that that person is the owner thereof may be taken into account by the Revenue Commissioners"
Click to expand...

Sahd, thanks for that information! aj
 
ajapale said:
The revenue spokes lady reiterated that a tenant / occupier who had been written to by revenue in relation to the LPT must furnish them with the owners identity and details.
Click to expand...

Here is an interesting quote from 'Accountancy Ireland' in respect of the finance bill for 2007:

Revenue may obtain an order from a District Justice “to produce evidential material” by production of an oath in circumstances where the District Justice is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for suspecting: “that a (tax) offence is being, has been or is about to be committed, and that material of value to the investigation of the offence,… is in the possession of a person specified in the application…”.

The new power uniquely introduces a potential term of imprisonment (not exceeding 6 months and/or a fine of up to €3,000) in addition to fine for a refusal to comply or a failure to comply without reasonable excuse.
Click to expand...

Interesting times ahead it would appear, assuming that all this was included in the FA.
 
Time said:
I never received a letter and nowt is being deducted from my income.
Click to expand...
ajapale said:
Will you challenge this?
Click to expand...
I think Time literally means what he has typed - "nowt is being deducted" - not a typo for "now it is being deducted". From Time's previous postings, he is non-resident so it's not surprising that Revenue's tentacles can't reach abroad to deduct from income. When he comes to sell may be when the issue will first arise.
 
orka said:
I think Time literally means what he has typed - "nowt is being deducted" - not a typo for "now it is being deducted". From Time's previous postings, he is non-resident so it's not surprising that Revenue's tentacles can't reach abroad to deduct from income. When he comes to sell may be when the issue will first arise.
Click to expand...

Thanks Orka, I read "now it is being" deducted. Im not familiar with the word "nowt"!

Time, is it possible that revenue are sending letters to a tenant, former tenant or occupier? or perhaps some random individual with some tenous connection to your property?

The spokeslady for revenue stated that, in the first instance, they will be following PAYE people. (Irish payroll and pensions).
 
A friends brother has just had it deducted from his salary in one go. It is for a property he rented two years ago and has not lived in for over a year. So he would not have got a letter. I think that employers should let you know that your tax has changed so that you can ring up and sort out before getting landed with a surprise like that.
 
I suspect that employers do not know that Revenue are going to kick in hard - most employers use a standard computer package to calculate gross to net - and if Revenue state that they're owed money, it comes off the gross! No discussions with employers beforehand! I thought that the Revenue person (Josephine ?) was actually quite straightforward, factual, knowledgeable, and determined in her public portrayal of collection of these dastardly taxes.
 
Eithneangela said:
... the Revenue person (Josephine ?) was actually quite straightforward, factual, knowledgeable, and determined in her public portrayal of collection of these dastardly taxes.
Click to expand...
Josephine Feehily is not just a Revenue person she is the Revenue, Chairperson thereof!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top