asked the Minister for Finance if customs officers are paid a bounty for seizures; and the amount that was paid out by the Exchequer in 1984.

There is statutory provision for the payment of rewards to customs officers for the seizure of uncustomed goods. A total of £86,961 was paid in 1984.

Are these payments subject to tax?

No.

Does the Minister agree that they should not be subject to tax? It seems to be a very agreeable perquisite.

Certainly I will examine the matter behind the question the Deputy asked. As he suggested, it may seem it is a very agreeable perk that goes back to section 213 of the Customs (Consolidation) Act, 1876, and I should have to think for rather a long time before I would disturb such a tradition.

Will the Minister agree that what Deputy McGahon calls a very agreeable perk has become a much more important source of revenue in view of the fact that cross-Border smuggling and traffic was not quite as significant in 1876 as in 1985?

There was no Border then.

In view of the fact, will the Minister not acknowledge that the increasing bounty being paid is a reflection of the increasing flow of smuggling and shopping across the Border which is something he should endeavour to contain by reducing the tax rates?

I am very tempted but I do not propose to take up the last part of the Deputy's question except to say I do not believe there is such a thing as a self-financing tax cut. Reading between the lines of what the Deputy has said in the past few months it appears he does not believe it either. With regard to the first part of the question, there is a scale of reward in relation to these matters which was last fixed in 1981.