Before you begin
What decides which rules apply
Everything here is on the fund's key information document or factsheet, which the provider must give you and which is usually two pages.
Domicile is where the fund is established. It is not where you live, where your broker is, or where the shares it holds are listed.
UCITS is a European regulatory standard. If the factsheet says it, the fund is one, and that settles the regime on its own.
The distributing question only matters for funds outside the EU, EEA and OECD treaty network, and the honest answer is almost always no.
For a life policy the question is where the insurer is established, not where you live or where you signed. It is on the policy document, and an Irish branch of an overseas insurer counts as Ireland.
The personal portfolio question is about the contract, not about how much say you took. If the terms let you nominate the assets, the answer is yes even if you never did.
Reading the answer
Reading your regime
The rate is the headline, but the eight-year rule is usually the bigger deal. It charges tax on a gain you have not realised, which changes what a long hold actually returns.
Losses behave very differently between regimes. Under the fund regimes a loss is simply lost, while under the CGT regimes it can shelter other gains.
Who pays matters more than people expect. Where the fund operates the tax you may never file anything; where it cannot, the whole liability is yours to self-assess and the deadline is yours to miss.
The two 38% regimes look identical on rate and differ on administration. An Irish fund usually deducts the tax for you, while an equivalent offshore fund leaves the same charge entirely in your hands.
Where the answer comes back as one of two, the gap between them is the point. It tells you whether establishing equivalence properly is worth paying for.
Read the USC and PRSI line before comparing rates. A 38% charge really is 38%, because the fund regimes are taken out of the USC charge, while a marginal-rate outcome is 40% with USC and PRSI stacked on top of it.
A foreign life policy carries the same 38% as an Irish one and none of its convenience. The insurer cannot operate Irish tax, and taking the policy out is itself a filing obligation.
Boundaries
Assumptions and limitations
Working assumptions
- The regimes here are the ones Revenue's manuals set out for an individual Irish tax resident. Corporate investors and pension wrappers are charged differently and are out of scope.
- The personal portfolio rate is applied only where it can reach: to Irish funds, equivalent offshore funds and life policies. A fund outside the EU, EEA and OECD treaty network is taxed under a different chapter that neither anti-avoidance section touches, so answering yes there leaves the ordinary outcome in place rather than inventing a 60% charge.
Where to be careful
- This sorts a holding into a regime. It does not calculate tax, and it cannot see your fund.
- Whether a fund that is not a UCITS is equivalent to an Irish one is a legal and regulatory judgement Revenue expects the investor to make, with advice. The tool shows both outcomes rather than deciding.
- It is not tax advice and does not tell you what to buy, sell or hold.
- A life policy from outside the EU, EEA and OECD treaty network is deliberately left without a rate. Chapter 6 of Part 26 does not reach it, and nothing published replaces the 38% with a single figure, so the tool says what is unsettled instead of guessing.
- The Investment Account announced for 2027 is not here. Deemed disposal will not apply inside it, but its threshold, rate and contribution cap are set in Budget 2027 and until then any figure would be invented.
Worked example
The same question, answered end to end
A US-domiciled ETF, which is not a UCITS, held by an Irish tax resident.
What was entered
- A fund rather than shares held directly
- Domiciled in the USA, which is an OECD state with an Irish tax treaty
- Not authorised as a UCITS
How it is worked out
The USA is an OECD state Ireland has a double taxation agreement with, so the fund is in the EU, EEA and OECD treaty group rather than outside it.
A UCITS authorisation would settle equivalence on its own. Without one, whether the fund is similar in all material respects to an Irish regulated fund is a legal and regulatory question Revenue expects the investor to answer.
If it is equivalent, gains and payments are charged at 38% and the eight-year deemed disposal rule applies.
If it is not, gains are charged at 33% CGT, income at marginal rates with PRSI and USC, and there is no eight-year rule.
Either way the tax is self-assessed, because the fund cannot operate it.
What the tool returns
- Your regime
- One of two, depending on equivalence
- If equivalent
- 38% on gains and payments
- If not equivalent
- 33% Capital Gains Tax
- Who pays it either way
- You, through self-assessment
Common questions
Questions about this tool
Why is there no single tax rate for funds in Ireland?
Because the rules grew up separately. Irish funds and life products sit in the gross roll-up regime at 38%. Offshore funds were brought in later and split by where they are established and what they legally are, which produces four more outcomes ranging from 33% CGT to your marginal income tax rate. The Department of Finance's own roadmap describes the result as overly complex and a disincentive to diversified investment.
Does it matter where I bought the fund, or which broker I use?
No. What matters is where the fund itself is domiciled and what it legally is. The same fund bought through two different brokers is taxed identically, and a fund managed from London or New York is very often domiciled in Ireland.
What changed in 2022?
Revenue used to confirm that ETFs domiciled in the USA, the EEA or an OECD treaty state followed the treatment that applies to shares generally. It withdrew that with effect from 1 January 2022, so investors now have to establish the treatment of their specific product. Where such a fund is found equivalent to an Irish one, the eight-year clock is counted from 2022 rather than from purchase.
Why does my answer come back as two possible regimes?
Because for a fund that is not a UCITS, whether it is equivalent to an Irish regulated fund is a legal and regulatory judgement, and Revenue expects the investor to make it rather than assume. Showing both outcomes is more useful than refusing: the gap between them tells you whether it is worth paying somebody to settle the question.
Is a non-distributing fund outside the treaty network really the worst case?
On the numbers, usually yes. The gain is charged to income tax at your marginal rate with USC and PRSI on top rather than at a capital gains rate, the cost is not indexed for inflation, and no loss relief is available at all. It is also the default: unless a fund applies to Revenue and is certified as distributing for the period, it is treated as non-distributing.
My policy is with a European insurer. Is that the same as an Irish one?
On rate, yes: a foreign life policy from an EU or EEA state, or from an OECD state Ireland has a tax treaty with, is charged at the same 38% for chargeable events on or after 1 January 2026. On everything else, no. The insurer cannot operate Irish exit tax, so nothing is deducted for you; section 730I makes taking the policy out a return obligation in its own right, before any gain arises; and the eight-year deemed disposal runs from the inception of the policy. A policy from outside that network is not a foreign life policy for these rules at all, and there is no published rate that takes the place of the 38%.
What makes something a personal portfolio product?
That the assets inside it were, or could have been, selected by you or by someone connected to you. Revenue's view is that there is no collective investment left in that arrangement, so the gain is charged at 60% rather than at exit tax, and at 80% where it is not correctly returned. Choosing a fund from a provider's list does not make it one. Being able to say which shares, property or deposits the vehicle should hold does. The test is what the contract permits, not what you actually asked for.
Will the new Investment Account simplify this?
Inside the account, yes. The Department of Finance's roadmap says the existing regime will not apply to it, deemed disposal included, and accounts are expected during 2027. Outside it, nothing changes yet. Simplifying the existing rules is listed for Budget 2028 and beyond, and described as an area for consideration rather than a commitment.