Ivana Bacik (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State. This section relates to stamp duty. Many Members have been contacted by first-time residential property buyers who were formerly exempt from stamp duty in the past number of days. They have not only experienced a reduction in their pay packets, an increase in the cost of their health insurance and the impact of the universally detested USC but they will also have to pay stamp duty, which they had not anticipated, when buying a home. I received an e-mail, which I am sure other Members received, in which the individual said he and his partner face an additional payment of €4,000, which is a significant amount, as a result of the changes proposed in this section. I am sure the Minister of State will point out that there is a reduction in stamp duty for non-first-time buyers. That is to be welcomed in terms of trying to get the housing market moving. At the very least there should have been transitional measures for first-time buyers who are actively contemplating buying a house or who have started the process. I accept there is a provision in section 66(3) relating to transitional arrangements but I gather - the Minister of State might clarify - that people will still be caught who had not anticipated having to pay this amount and for whom this will make a significant difference, especially given the effect of the budgetary measures and the imposition of the universal social charge on their January pay packets.

We did not have a chance to discuss the universal social charge due to time limits in the debate earlier today. The Labour Party tabled recommendation No. 5 on the matter on Committee Stage and I hope we will be able to return to the issue on Report Stage to discuss the impact of the universal social charge which, as the Minister of State will be well aware, has been the subject of enormous concern to people. An economic impact assessment should have been carried out on the imposition of the universal social charge. It was ironic that the impact of removing the section 23 tax relief was to be assessed prior to being introduced yet the universal social charge was simply to be introduced without any economic impact assessment, especially concerning low earners. That was the subject of our amendment which, as the Leas-Chathaoirleach is aware, we did not reach.