Former MD 'struggling to survive emotionally' fails in €317,212 tax battle with Revenue
The man's aunt died in 2017, and her nephew inherited a home from her, but following an investigation, the Revenue Commissioners last year issued a bill to the man for an underpayment of €288,465 in CAT, along with €28,846 surcharge for a late submission return.
Revenue issued the assessment on the basis that the man received a house from his aunt on her death, which was not her main residence, along with free accommodation and cash gifts from the woman.
Disputing the assessment and claiming exemptions from the imposition of CAT, the man claimed that he was a dependent relative of his aunt and that he was permanently incapacitated due to ongoing mental health issues.
On a submission to the TAC on behalf of the appellant, it stated that he is at the end of his working life and is unable to support himself.
It further stated that 'he is very vulnerable and emotionally struggling to survive, which his medical reports have clearly stated'.
The submission also states that his ongoing medical condition has resulted in a further decline in his ability to support himself in any independent way.
The submission states that he is a person for whom the dwelling house exemption was legislated for.
However, in her findings, Appeals Commissioner Clare O'Driscoll has found that as a material fact that the man, prior to or at the time of his aunt's death in 2017, was not permanently and totally incapacitated due to mental or physical infirmity from maintaining himself.
Ms O'Driscoll stated that this was on the basis that the medical documentation did not establish that the appellant was at any time permanently and totally incapacitated from mental or physical infirmity.
In further supporting her conclusion, Mr O'Driscoll pointed to the man's LinkedIn profile from August 2022, which stated that the man was an MD at the time and had been since July 1988.
A letter from April 2024 was submitted on the man's behalf by a doctor who said that the man 'has suffered from an extremely disabling condition for the past 25 years or so'.
The doctor stated that 'the level of anxiety associated with this condition is the highest for any mental health condition. Resolution to this condition has been impossible to general adult psychiatry to date'.
He said that the appellant 'is doing everything in his power to combat the exceptional level of anxiety that he is experiencing...It would not surprise me if the High Court designated him as a vulnerable adult and made him a Ward of Court to protect his welfare'.
However, the doctor did not appear as a witness to be cross-examined, and Revenue contended that the appellant was not incapacitated at the time of his aunt's death in 2017.
Ms O'Driscoll accepts that the appellant has experienced poor mental health since at least 2008 but none of the documentation states that the appellant was at any time permanently and totally incapacitated.
Ms O'Driscoll stated that she had no documentation on the man's health in 2017 and as a result has no guidance as to the state of his mental health at the time of his aunt's death in December 2017.
Ms O'Driscoll found that the man was not a dependent relative and therefore not entitled to an exemption from CAT and that the man was not entitled to an exemption to CAT as the home was not his aunt's main residence.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
14 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Former 'bogus self-employed' RTÉ worker loses claim to retrospective pay at WRC
A former 'bogus self-employed' worker at RTÉ has lost his claim to retrospective pay and holiday entitlements as a result of the misclassification of his employment status for over six years. The WRC ruled that it did not have the jurisdiction to hear complaints made by RTÉ employee, Joseph Kelly, in relation to his former employment status because they had been submitted outside the statutory timeframe. Mr Kelly claimed he was originally required by RTÉ to register as a contractor with Revenue when he began working with the broadcaster in September 2012. He claimed he lost out on entitlements to annual leave, sick leave, public holidays, and incremental salary increases as a result of having to become self-employed. Represented by a lay advisor, Martin McMahon, Mr Kelly sought to have his loss of earnings for a period of over six years corrected and the necessary adjustments to his current salary scale. Eight separate claims, which were lodged with the WRC on October 9, 2024, were brought under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 and the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994. However, solicitor for RTÉ, Séamus Given of Arthur Cox LLP, submitted that the cognisable period given the six-month statutory limitation of the legislation governing claims to the WRC was from April 10, 2024. Mr Given argued that Mr Kelly had been properly paid and given all his public holiday and annual leave entitlements over the relevant period. He also claimed that the WRC had no jurisdiction to hear or extend the time limit for submitting a complaint beyond a 12-month period. The WRC heard that Mr Kelly was hired as an independent contractor in September 2012 and paid €200 per day as a media content coordinator before being made an employee of RTÉ on November 12, 2018. He currently works as a news co-ordinator placed on point 12 of a 14-point salary scale which ranges from €37,567 to €59,862. Mr McMahon pointed out that bogus self-employment among workers at RTÉ was the subject of a review by an independent law firm as well as the Department of Social Protection. He told the WRC Mr Kelly was unaware of these reviews which resulted in RTÉ having to make a payment of approximately €30,000 to the department to regularise his PRSI contributions. Mr McMahon said it also led to Mr Kelly losing out on any entitlements to pay for working Sundays and public holidays as well as annual and sick leave and any other entitlement that permanent employees had. Mr McMahon claimed Mr Kelly was continuing to lose out due to the consequences of his initial employment misclassification and had made numerous efforts to resolve these matters without success. He argued that Mr Kelly was seeking to have his entitlements rectified and regularised so that he did not suffer any loss for the error which RTÉ accepted it had made. In his ruling, WRC adjudicator John Harraghy noted that Mr Kelly had provided extensive documentation in relation to the context and background of his claim and his attempts to seek a resolution with his employer. The WRC adjudicator said it was clear that Mr Kelly and Mr McMahon had committed a considerable amount of time and research on the issue. He observed that all the issues that were the subject of his complaints related to the period covering his employment status up to November 2018 when he was not afforded any of the rights that an employee would have accrued. However, he said his role was to apply the law to the facts but he could only consider complaints submitted within the statutory timeframe provided for by the relevant legislation. He said WRC adjudication officers were not empowered to modify timeframes or accept complaints which fell outside timeframes outlined by law. For that reason, Mr Harraghy said he had no jurisdiction to consider the complaints made by Mr Kelly. During a two-day hearing which took place in December 2024 and June 2025, RTÉ was accused of engaging in 'sharp practice' and attempting to 'run down the clock' on a commitment to compensate those who had lost money as a result of bogus self-employment. Mr Kelly said that when he joined the station in 2012 that the HR section told him he had to become a sole trader which also meant he was not allowed to apply for internal jobs at RTÉ. A senior HR manager at RTÉ, Angela McEvoy, said the station had accepted a decision by the Department of Social Protection in relation to Mr Kelly's PRSI insurability. However, Ms McEvoy rejected the suggestion by Mr McMahon that RTÉ had got Mr Kelly to misrepresent himself to Revenue. Mr McMahon told the WRC that it was 'not acceptable' for RTÉ to promise to follow the recommendations of an expert report in relation to bogus self-employed workers and now claim Mr Kelly's case was 'out of time.'
Irish Examiner
2 days ago
- Irish Examiner
'Preferred bidder' found for MV Matthew berthed in Cork Harbour
Drug trafficking cargo ship the MV Matthew has cost the State almost €10m in maintenance, crewing, and berthing fees since it was intercepted in 2023. A buyer has been found for the drug trafficking ship, and the Revenue Commissioners are engaging with Panamanian authorities to ensure legal and regulatory compliance. The MV Matthew, a Panamanian-registered ship, was at the centre of the largest cocaine seizure in the history of the State. Eight men were sentenced to a combined 129 years in prison in July for their role in the drug trafficking operation in which some €157m worth of cocaine was seized. The MV Matthew, owned by a Dubai-based company, was boarded at gunpoint by Ireland's elite army ranger wing in rough seas off the Cork coast in September 2023. Eight men from the 21-person crew were ultimately charged with drug trafficking offences. The ship, which has since been berthed in Cork Harbour, has been costing an average of €120,000 each week to maintain. However, Revenue has confirmed that 'a preferred bidder has been identified' for the MV Matthew. 'Revenue is engaging with the Panamanian authorities to ensure compliance with maritime legislation and regulations that govern the disposal of the MV Matthew, and has received confirmation from them that it is receiving attention,' a statement said. 'Revenue hopes to have these matters finalised shortly. Revenue is required to ensure that all regulations and legal obligations are fully complied with throughout the disposal and removal process.' 'Far too long' Berthing the ship, which includes costs for unberthing and moving the vessel when necessary, has cost €2,187,950. Maintenance of the ship — including fuel costs, waste removal, and repairs — has cost €3,784,050. Crewing has cost 3,762,054. More than €9,734,054 has been spent on the ship in total. These costs were paid by the Revenue Commissioners to maintain and manage the MV Matthew from September 2023 to the end of July 2025. Fianna Fáil TD for Cork South Central Séamus McGrath said that the disposal of the MV Matthew is taking 'far too long'. 'The cost of keeping it on a weekly basis is extremely high,' he said. 'I doubt very much at this stage if the State will actually be any net better off as a result of the sale, given the amount of cost that was incurred in terms of the storage and maintenance of the ship.' The ship had been maintained to allow access for defence legal teams as it was at the centre of a major criminal trial. The Special Criminal Court authorised its release on December 2. It was only possible to dispose of the ship from that date. Mr McGrath said that it should have been ready for sale as soon as it was released by the courts. He said he has raised his concerns both with Revenue and with the Public Accounts Committee, and has requested further information on the sales process.
Sunday World
2 days ago
- Sunday World
Former managing director loses appeal over €317k tax bill after inheriting house from aunt
The man claimed he was a dependant relative of his aunt and that he is permanently incapacitated due to mental health issues Independent Trustee Company (ITC) says Mr Kelly living at the property 'does not break any Revenue investment rules'. Photo: stock image A former managing director who is said to be 'struggling to survive emotionally' has lost an appeal against a €317,312 bill for Capital Acquisitions Tax (CAT) which arose from a bequest from his aunt. After the man's aunt died in 2017, he inherited her house. Following an investigation, the Revenue Commissioners issued a bill to him last year for underpayment of €288,465 in CAT along with a €28,846 surcharge for a late submission return. Revenue issued the assessment on the basis that the man received a house that was not his aunt's main residence, along with free accommodation and cash gifts. Disputing the assessment and claiming exemptions from the imposition of CAT, the man claimed he was a dependant relative of his aunt and that he is permanently incapacitated due to mental health issues. Independent Trustee Company (ITC) says Mr Kelly living at the property 'does not break any Revenue investment rules'. Photo: stock image News in 90 Seconds - August 15th In a submission to the Tax Appeals Commission on his behalf, it was stated that he is at the end of his working life and unable to support himself. 'He is very vulnerable and emotionally struggling to survive, which his medical reports have clearly stated,' the submission read. However, appeals commissioner Clare O'Driscoll found as a material fact, and based on medical documentation, that the man was not permanently and totally incapacitated due to mental or physical infirmity prior, or at the time of, his aunt's death in 2017. She noted his LinkedIn profile from August 2022 stated that the man was a managing director at the time and had been since July 1988. A letter from April 2024 was submitted on the man's behalf by a doctor who said he 'has suffered from an extremely disabling condition for the past 25 years or so'. The doctor said 'the level of anxiety associated with this condition is the highest for any mental health condition. Resolution to this condition has been impossible to general adult psychiatry to date'. He said the man 'is doing everything in his power to combat the exceptional level of anxiety that he is would not surprise me if the High Court designated him as a vulnerable adult and made him a ward of court to protect his welfare'. The doctor did not appear as a witness. Revenue contended that the appellant was not incapacitated at the time of his aunt's death in 2017. Ms O'Driscoll accepted the appellant had experienced poor mental health since at least 2008, but none of the documentation showed he was ever totally incapacitated. She had no documentation on the man's health in 2017. She found that the man was not a dependant relative and therefore not entitled to an exemption from CAT.
