
Reducing Vat rate a blunt and costly policy instrument for hospitality
Of the total budget package detailed in the summer economic statement, €1.5bn has been allocated to a "tax package".
The Government identifies the narrowness of Ireland's tax base as a cause of concern in the summer economic statement, noting that income tax, corporation tax, and revenue make up the bulk of Ireland's tax base.
At a time of heightened global economic uncertainty, increased tariffs for Irish exporters, a growing and ageing population, increasing demand for and pressure on services, a further narrowing of Ireland's tax base in the budget would seem at odds with the programme for government commitment to maintain a broad tax base "to guard against the need for counter-cyclical fiscal policy in the event of a downturn" and prepare for demographic change.
Much of the subsequent discussion on the so-called "tax package" has been the commitment in the programme for government to support the hospitality sector through changes to Vat and its implications in terms of the space available for any income tax changes in the budget.
According to the Department of Finance, a reduction in the Vat rate for the hospitality sector to 9% would cost almost €900m a year
This discussion fails to look at the broader context, the impact to date of "tax packages" introduced by the previous government from 2020-2025, and the precariousness of Ireland's tax base.
Looking at budgetary policy of the last government, income gaps have opened up between working households, and the gap between people and households at the bottom and middle of the income distribution and those at the top has grown.
This has been driven by the skewed nature of income tax reduction choices which prioritised higher earners and provided relatively little to low income workers paying income tax at the standard rate.
This was further compounded by the concentration of temporary cost-of-living measures among lower income households, supports that will fade away. The tax packages contained in those budgets are permanent, costly, and have not reached those working households who have been most impacted by rising costs.
Ireland's tax base is narrow, dominated by three revenue streams, and our over exposure in terms of corporation tax is a major concern
Rather than looking at how to build a broad and sustainable tax base, recent discussion has focused on the "tax package", the cost of the aforementioned Vat reduction for the hospitality sector, which would narrow Ireland's tax base further, and how much this would leave for an "income tax package" which — if modelled on previous budgetary policy — will see the income gaps between working households grow further.
Softening demand
Looking at Vat, it accounted for 23% of Ireland's total tax revenue last year. At present, the hospitality sector is subject to the reduced 13.5% Vat rate. The sector was subject to the lower rate of 9% from 2011 to 2018, and again from late 2020 to mid-2023 at an estimated cost of €3.6bn.
The sector has identified high energy costs, softening demand, labour market challenges, increased cost of inputs, and a lack of hotel capacity as the main challenges facing the industry and the rationale for a return to the 9% VAT rate.
However, a recent Department of Finance examination of the Vat reduction for the hospitality sector since 2011 concluded that the reduction was not always passed on to customers in the form of lower prices, it was highly regressive in that it benefitted higher income households more than lower income households, and it was very costly.
It is clear that parts of the hospitality sector are under significant pressure, but other parts of it are doing very well
Reducing the Vat rate is a very blunt and costly policy instrument. It will not lower energy costs, it will not increase demand, nor will it address the challenge of full employment or produce more hotel capacity — the very issues that the sector itself has identified as major challenges.
The Government and the sector must look at other available sustainable measures to support the industry, including measures used in other EU member states to support hospitality and tourism.
Calls for new tax breaks, or the return of old ones, are a feature of most periods of economic and social recovery. However, their provision involves great cost to the State and the unequal allocation of these resources to small groups of beneficiaries.
Few of these initiatives have proven to be worthwhile in the past — in particular the opportunity cost of using the revenue in a better way is frequently overlooked.
As the first of the kites are flown in advance of Budget 2026, the Government should turn its attention to those who have been most impacted by persistent rising prices, and use the resources available to ensure that vulnerable households are protected and supported through adequate social welfare rates, and that growing income gaps between working households are closed.
It must deliver on the commitment to progressive budgets and build a broad and sustainable revenue base that can meet the needs of a growing and ageing population
This requires developing progressive policies and measures in a fair taxation system, and working with the hospitality sector to identify sustainable ways to fund the maintenance of the hospitality and tourism industry.
A reduction in Vat for the hospitality sector is costly and it won't address the challenges the sector faces. It didn't address these core issues in the 124 months that it was applied between 2011 and 2023, and there is no evidence to suggest that it will do so if applied again in Budget 2026.
Michelle Murphy is a research and policy analyst at Social Justice Ireland

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Daily Mirror
25 minutes ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
'Dynamic pricing is scourge on music': TD calls for end to ticket price gouging
A TD has called for an end to Ticketmaster price gouging as fans ready themselves for the long-awaited Oasis gigs in Croke Park later this month. Music lovers were left stunned after being forced to shell out around €400 for a ticket the band's Dublin concerts after tickets went on sale last year, despite standing tickets initially being advertised at €86.50 plus booking fees. Speaking ahead of the two sold-out Oasis shows, Labour Party spokesperson on Culture, Robert O'Donoghue, recalled the outrageous price gouging allowed by Ticketmaster this time last year. 'Dynamic pricing is a scourge on modern music, sport and cultural ticket purchases,' Deputy O'Donoghue said. 'Since Ticketmaster introduced the practice in 2022, fans and spectators have seen sudden price increases, sometimes of up to 500 per cent, of already expensive ticket prices. "While there are excuses made that this practice falls to event organisers, when Ticketmaster has a near monopoly on ticket selling, they are ultimately the ones in charge of allowing such price hikes to happen. 'This is leading us down a path where only the very well-off can afford to go to a gig without putting themselves under severe financial strain. "Minister for Enterprise Peter Burke has stated to me in a parliamentary question that he is awaiting the results of the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC)'s investigation on the matter of dynamic pricing, but the evidence is already clear in the bank balance of anyone who bought an Oasis ticket. "Last year, Government introduced the Sale of Tickets (Cultural, Entertainment, Recreational and Sporting Events) (Amendment) Bill 2024 to ensure these rip-off ticket prices do not happen again, but we haven't seen anything of it since. "I am calling on Government to progress this legislation to tackle rip-off ticket prices. The time for action is now." Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest news from the Irish Mirror direct to your inbox: Sign up here. The Irish Mirror's Crime Writers Michael O'Toole and Paul Healy are writing a new weekly newsletter called Crime Ireland. Click here to sign up and get it delivered to your inbox every week


Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Trump orders firing of labour statistics commissioner after dismal employment report
Donald Trump on Friday ordered that the commissioner of the US Labour Department's Bureau of Labour Statistics be fired after data showed weaker than expected employment growth in July and large downward revisions to the prior two months' job counts. Erika McEntarfer was nominated by Mr Trump's predecessor Joe Biden to serve in the role in 2023 and was confirmed by the US Senate the following year. It was not immediately clear whether Ms McEntarfer, whom Mr Trump accused of faking the jobs numbers, had been fired. 'We need accurate Jobs Numbers. I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY. She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified,' Mr Trump said in a post on Truth Social. The US president claimed that Ms McEntarfer had 'faked' employment figures in the run-up to last year's election, in a bid to boost his Democrat rival Kamala Harris's chances of victory. He insisted that the US economy was, in fact, 'BOOMING' on his watch. There is no evidence to back Mr Trump's claims of data manipulation by the bureau, the statistical agency that compiles the closely watched employment report as well as consumer and producer price data. The White House did not respond immediately to questions about Mr Trump's post. His comments come at a time when the Trump administration's mass lay-offs of federal government workers have raised concerns about the quality of US economic data, long seen as the gold standard. Earlier this year, commerce secretary Howard Lutnick disbanded two expert committees that worked with the government to produce economic statistics. Mr Lutnick has also floated the idea of stripping out government spending from the gross domestic product report, claiming 'governments historically have messed with GDP'. The bureau has already reduced data collection for its consumer price data and producer price reports. Economists attributed the sharply slower job growth to Mr Trump's trade and immigration policies. The report showed the US economy created only 73,000 jobs last month. Data for May and June were revised sharply down to show 258,000 fewer jobs created than had been previously reported. – Reuters (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2025


Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Trading principles for predictability — what the EU gave up to avoid a tariff war
In the hours following the announcement that the US and EU had struck a deal last weekend on tariffs, European reaction was mixed. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the deal, which imposes 15% tariffs on most items going both ways, "creates certainty in uncertain times" and "delivers stability and predictability, for citizens and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic" as she tried to sell the deal to the 27 EU member states. But if Ms von der Leyen expected a lap of honour to ease her troubled start to her second term, one was not coming. "It is a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, brought together to affirm their common values and to defend their common interests, resigns itself to submission," French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou wrote on X of what he called the "von der Leyen-Trump deal". German Chancellor Friedrich Merz himself initially appeared satisfied, saying that the agreement "succeeded in averting a trade conflict that would have hit the export-oriented German economy hard". But by Monday, amid cross-party criticism, Mr Merz said the deal would "substantially damage" his nation's finances, but acknowledged that the negotiating team "couldn't expect to achieve any more" as Mr Trump's willingness to enter into a 30% trade war was apparent. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, an ally of Mr Trump, said the US president "ate von der Leyen for breakfast" while Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said he would support it "without any enthusiasm". Across the bloc, there has been criticism of Europe's perceived capitulation, with many echoing Mr Bayrou's sentiments that it poses fundamental questions about the cohesiveness of the project. German Green MP Sandra Detzer told her parliament that the EU "has agreed to a deal that abandons fundamental principles of rules-based global trade, instead of long-term stability". Ms Detzer's alarm is representative of a particular sharp end of the deal. According to one think tank, the deal will cost the German economy around €6.5bn in terms of its GDP in the first year, while experts have slashed the country's growth forecasts in recent months. Fabio de Masi, a German MEP, told EuroNews this week that not only was the deal bad, it was "a betrayal" for which Ms von der Leyen should resign. The bloc is set to face 15% tariffs on most of its goods including cars, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals entering the US, and 'zero for zero' tariffs on a number of products including aircraft, some agricultural goods and certain chemicals – as well as EU purchases of US energy worth €643bn over three years. But as the tariffs were set to kick in on Friday, the two sides had not agreed on all of the details, which Ms von der Leyen's commission has stressed will be a "set of principles" and not a trade deal. On Thursday, commission spokesperson Olof Gill said that "from there will flow the additional negotiated exemptions that we're looking to bake into our agreement with the US". Drinks tariffs What shape those carveouts take is still to be decided, with a 15% tariff applying until they are. That is of particular concern to the drinks industry across the continent. From Irish whiskey to French and Spanish wines, exporters across Europe have been arguing for a carveout on their products. The US tariff on European spirits is currently 10%. Brussels is keen to reduce that to zero or, for wine at least, to the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rates that are set on a fixed cost per litre basis, rather than in percentage terms. Until recently, spirits had benefited from zero tariffs between the US and EU following an agreement in 1997 that also included other countries such as Canada and Japan. That lasted until 2018, when the EU response to US steel and aluminium tariffs included increased duties on US bourbon and other spirits. These were suspended in 2021. From Irish whiskey to French and Spanish wines, exporters across Europe have been arguing for a carveout on their products. File photo US most-favoured-nation rates for wine are 19.8c per litre for sparkling and 6.3c per litre for most other wine, which equates to very low rates in most cases. But as Mr Trump signed an executive order overnight into Friday, there was no movement on the exemption and the drinks industry will, for now at least, pay the 15% rate. With EU officials privately briefing Reuters that negotiations could run into late autumn, that will mean financial pain for those businesses in the short-term, at least. Speaking to journalists at a press conference on Thursday, commission spokesperson Olof Gill said: 'The commission remains determined to achieve and secure the maximum number of carve-outs, including for traditional EU products such as wine and spirits. 'It is not our expectation that wine and spirits would be included as an exemption in the first group announced by the US tomorrow, and therefore that sector, as with all other economic sectors, will be captured by the 15% ceiling.' Motor tariffs In Germany, a number of car manufacturers revised down profit guidance on the back of the tariffs, which will face a 15% tariff as well, but for BMW, the impact of the agreement was "exaggerated". 'I think this tariff discussion is way exaggerated and also its effects on the industry,' chief executive Oliver Zipse told the Financial Times. 'What's more important is the question, are the products attractive?' Carveouts At Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, enterprise minister Peter Burke updated ministers on the detail of the weekend's agreement, telling journalists that there will be exemptions to the tariff regime, with aviation one for which Ireland had successfully argued alongside others. 'The key thing is that there will be a number of carveouts. Obviously, aviation has been cited as zero-for-zero, but also in relation to agri-foods and potentially spirits.' Ireland, like many other countries, is banking on the carveouts agreed protecting key sectors like agri-foods and that the rate for pharmaceuticals would not exceed 15%. Like many countries across Europe, ministers here are privately saying that the deal is far from ideal, but also query what else is to be done. By Friday, they could point to Mr Trump's executive order, which imposed tariffs on many countries with whom he had not negotiated. But there is also acceptance that the tariff regime brings with it a new reality, one with which the EU needs to grapple. If countries are arguing for exceptions, how does the European negotiating team balance those interests? And what will the reaction be when the final deal is reached?