Example 2. Small Gifts Exemption
Both parents gift €3,000 to their child each year for 10 years, which the child saves. This
amounts to €60,000 after 10 years. This amount can be used as the child wishes and is not
subject to CAT – as the annual €3,000 small gifts exemption from each parent for each of the 10
years is not exceeded.
In addition, the €335,000 lifetime tax-free threshold is preserved intact for use against larger gifts
or inheritances.
2. Exemption in respect of payments for support, maintenance and education (position prior
to Finance Act 2014)
2.1 Section 82(2) CATCA exempts from CAT money or money’s worth given by an individual (“the
disponer”) during his or her lifetime for the support, maintenance or education of his or her
children, his or her civil partner’s children or a person in relation to whom he or she stands in
loco parentis, as well as payments for the support or maintenance of a dependent relative
under section 466, TCA 1997.
2.2 To qualify for the exemption, the provision of the support, maintenance or education must be –
(i) Such as would be part of the normal expenditure of a person in the circumstances of the
disponer, and
(ii) Reasonable, having regard to the nancial circumstances of the disponer.
2.3 Revenue’s view is that “normal” in this context refers to the nature of the expenditure rather than
the amount and that it means expenditure that might typically be incurred by a person in the
circumstances of the disponer.
For example, payment of fees and accommodation costs for a dependent child attending college
would be normal and would be exempt from gift tax – albeit not all parents would incur such
costs. On the other hand, the purchase of a house for a child would not be considered part of the
“normal” expenditure of a disponer, regardless of the nancial means of the disponer and would
not be exempt from gift tax.
2.4 “Reasonable” has to be judged by reference to the nancial circumstances of the disponer. This
requirement prevents a disponer from, for example, making payments that are disproportionate
when viewed in the light of the disponer’s means. However, it does not, of itself, set a general
ceiling on the value of what can be provided by way of maintenance or support.
2.5 Revenue’s long held interpretation of the exemption provided by Section 82(2) CATCA 2003 is
that it does not cover all payments by a parent to a child notwithstanding that such payments
may meet the tests of “normal” and “reasonable” outlined in the foregoing paragraphs. The
exemption only applies to the provision of support, maintenance or education. This implies
at least some level of nancial dependence on the part of the child. Revenue does not accept
that gifts to a child who is nancially independent can come within the terms of the exemption.
Neither does it accept that gifts of a capital nature to a child are exempt from gift tax under this
section.