Nigel Huddleston

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

The complete record

3,240 held · 3,233 searchable for Nigel Huddleston. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 10.

This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.

1. “I do not have much more to add, other than to point out the strength of our creative industries in all four nations of the United Kingdom, which I am glad has been recognised across the Committee today. It is an incredible strength, and I am therefore pleased to hear today the very obvious cross-party agreement on continuing support for this vital sector. Question put and agreed to. Clause 16 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 17 and 18 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 20 Collective investment schemes: co-ownership schemes Question proposed , That the clause stand part of the Bill.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

2. “This clause prevents tax avoidance by ensuring that individuals cannot bypass anti-avoidance legislation by using a company to transfer assets abroad while still benefiting from the income they generate. I therefore commend the clause to the Committee.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

3. “The changes will have an impact on transactions only where the purpose of the transfer is to avoid tax and will not have an impact on transfers that are genuine commercial transactions. The changes will apply to income that arises after 6 April 2024, regardless of when the transfer took place. In situations where multiple shareholders are involved in the transfer of an asset, any resulting tax charge will be apportioned between those individuals in proportion to their respective shareholdings. Further details will be provided in HMRC guidance. The measure is expected to affect a small number of individuals a year and will raise about £15 million in tax revenue over the forecast period. This change was anticipated by external groups and demonstrates that the Government are quick to crack down on tax avoidance loopholes.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

4. “However, the Supreme Court decision means that a shareholder cannot be determined as a transferor, which therefore opens up a loophole that can be exploited by shareholders transferring assets abroad via a close company to avoid UK tax. A close company is a company with five or fewer participators, usually shareholders or directors, who have ownership or control over the business. The changes made by the clause will introduce a provision that deems an individual as the transferor where they are participators in a close company that transfers an asset to a person abroad in order to avoid UK tax. The amendment also applies to transfers by non-resident companies that would be treated as a close company if they were UK resident.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

5. “Clause 22 makes changes to ensure that individuals cannot use a company as a device to bypass anti-avoidance legislation, known as the transfer of assets abroad provisions. Those provisions are designed to prevent individuals from transferring ownership of income-generating assets, such as real estate or stocks, to an overseas individual or entity while still benefiting from the income that the assets generate. The provisions prevent the moving of assets into offshore structures outside the scope of UK taxation being a simple tax avoidance route for UK residents. The clause has been introduced following a Supreme Court decision. Prior to the decision, HMRC considered that shareholders and directors who controlled a company could transfer an asset and were therefore in scope of the transfer of assets abroad provisions.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

6. “Member for Hampstead and Kilburn some assurance. We appreciate the concerns that have raised by key stakeholders, and further information and guidance will be forthcoming. Question put and agreed to. Clause 22 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 23 Minor VAT amendments Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

7. “The purpose behind the legislation is primarily to ensure that the regime acts as intended. I will not go into the weeds on HMRC’s determination process—further guidance will be given—but HMRC will review the facts of a case to judge whether someone is directly or indirectly involved in the decision making of a company. It will accept evidence that shows whether someone is involved or not. However, any arrangements that are put in place purely to be used as evidence that an individual is not involved in the decision making of a company will be disregarded and a charge will be levied if the other conditions are met. As I said, HMRC will issue guidance on how it will approach the matter in due course. Decisions will be made based on the facts of each individual case. I hope that I have given the hon.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

8. “It is also important to remember that the legislation does not bring a tax charge when the transfer is for genuine commercial reasons or when tax avoidance was not the purpose of the transfer. The new legislation gives individuals the opportunity to exclude themselves from the tax charge if certain conditions are met. We respectfully disagree with the CIOT on some of those conditions. We have outlined some of those, and HMRC will produce further guidance in due course. On the retroactive criticism, the clause has retroactive effect because if it did not, it would have allowed individuals to abuse the loophole between the date of the Fisher judgment and the enactment of the legislation. Again, we do not believe that there will be a significant increase in complexity.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

9. “It would be easy for an individual to sidestep the legislation by transferring such an asset to a company that they controlled before the company then made the transfer abroad. The legislative changes are aimed at preventing that situation and ensuring that the TOAA rules are applied as intended. On the point about the legislation being broad, let us not forget that it is being brought in in response to the Supreme Court judgment; we are trying to make sure that it acts as intended throughout. The intention of the legislation is to put the situation involving transfers by companies back to how HMRC considered it operated before the Supreme Court decision. The transfer of assets abroad legislation aims to stop that tax avoidance.”

   House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

10. “I thank the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn for her comments. We very much appreciate the input that we have received from stakeholders and interested parties, including the Chartered Institute of Taxation. Some of those points are about broader issues around the TOAA regime, rather than specific to this legislation, but we do hear what they have to say. I will respond to the hon. Lady’s points about the changes that apply to companies when the TOAA regime is primarily about individuals. The transfer of assets abroad legislation is an anti-avoidance provision aimed at preventing individuals from avoiding a tax charge by transferring an asset to a person overseas while still being able to enjoy the income of that asset in some way.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

11. “To ensure that all VAT-registered businesses are treated equally, the changes will be given backdated effect to 1 January 2023, when the interest rules were introduced for VAT. Clause 23 makes some small changes to ensure that policy works as intended and to further Government commitments on reforming the VAT terminal markets order. I commend it to the Committee.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

12. “The IT system can already operate, but the legislation, mistakenly, does not always allow that automated recovery. The change will ensure that HMRC can do so in all cases instead of needing a different, onerous process for a minority of cases that the original legislation did not cover. The second change will make sure that VAT-registered businesses are always protected by a provision that creates a fairer basis for the calculation of interest where they owed money to HMRC over the same time that HMRC owed money to them. The original legislation failed to extend that safeguard to all scenarios in which that could happen with VAT, undermining the fairness of the interest regime.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

13. “Changes made by the Finance Act 2021 brought VAT interest in line with taxes such as income tax from 1 January last year. In implementing the new interest rules for VAT, HMRC has discovered some minor defects in the legislation, which without correction would force it to act in a way that conflicts with policy intent. Clause 23 will therefore make two changes to the interest rules. The first will address the situation in which interest ought to be repaid to HMRC because, following an assessment or amendment that reduces the amount of VAT credit, the repayment interest due is also reduced. It was always intended that HMRC could recover all these amounts through a simple automated process that does not add to burdens for taxpayers and HMRC alike.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

14. “The Government previously announced their intention to reform the order to reflect current market practices and to keep pace with market changes, such as trades in new products, including carbon credits. This clause takes that commitment forward. Finally, subsections (4) and (5) make changes to ensure that VAT interest rules operate as intended. For most major taxes, the Finance Act 2009 requires HMRC to pay interest on amounts due from HMRC to taxpayers, and to charge interest on late payments to HMRC. Historically, that regime did not apply to VAT, which had its own interest rules. Harmonising the rules on interest was an important step in delivering the Government’s ambition to build a trusted, modern tax administration system.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

15. “Under the new process, only essential details are required on the claim form, eliminating the need for claimants to submit certain evidential documents up front. Based on the information provided on the claim form, HMRC can then request evidential documents to verify the claim. Clause 23(1) will give HMRC a clear power under the DIY house builders’ scheme to require further evidential documentation, such as invoices, from the person who submitted a claim under the scheme. That will assist HMRC in verifying claims. Clause 23(3) is a minor update to the existing powers that allow for reform of the VAT terminal markets order. The order reduces VAT administration burdens on commodities traded on specified markets, so the power will allow for simplifications to support businesses trading those commodities.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

16. “Clause 23 makes some minor, technical changes to VAT legislation relating to the DIY house builders’ scheme and VAT credit in the penalty reform regime, and allows for reform of the VAT terminal markets order. I will speak briefly about each measure in turn. The DIY house builders’ scheme allows individuals building their own home, or converting a non-residential building to their own home, to recover VAT incurred on the cost. That puts individual house builders in the same position as property developers, who are able to sell new build residential property at a zero rate and recover the VAT they incur in the process of constructing new build properties. The scheme was simplified and made digital in December last year, which has significantly reduced the time taken for claims to be paid.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

17. “The hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey has been charming until this point, and now he goes back to this. I know him very well; I am sure he does not mean it. First, he knows as well as anybody in this House that everybody who comes into Parliament cares: they care about their constituents and they care about the country. We are motivated to come here because we want to make the country a better place for our children and grandchildren. I know that the hon. Gentleman occasionally gets rather vocal on some of these points, but I politely request that he be a little bit careful with some of his comments. I would never criticise the motivation, incentives or purposes of any colleague in this place. I may fundamentally disagree with some of their policies, but I will not disagree with their motivations.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

18. “We have spoken about that many times, and I know that it is particularly important to Scotland, where it is a disproportionately larger share of the economy than in England, for example, although it is important and large across every single constituency in the UK—and I do mean every single constituency. But the hon. Gentleman is being a little bit rich, because he knows as well as I do that there are other measures beyond VAT to support the hospitality and leisure industry. Of course, in England we have extended the 75% business rates reduction to the retail, hospitality and leisure sector, but that has not been done in Scotland, nor has it been done to its full extent in Wales.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

19. “Yet again, I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s trying to clarify, but I am a member of the Government and therefore I am afraid that I do take offence, direct or indirect. But that is a side point to the matters under discussion. The hon. Gentleman is making fair and valid points about the support that has been given, but I repeat that this Government, like every Government around the world, have had incredibly difficult circumstances to deal with. I do not think that there is any doubt whatever that the support measures that we have put in place to support lives and livelihoods have been incredible and stack up pretty well when compared internationally. That includes cost of living support, as I have mentioned. I know that the hon. Gentleman is a huge supporter of the tourism, hospitality and leisure industry.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

20. “Question put and agreed to. Clause 23 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 24 Collective money purchase arrangements Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

21. “I acknowledge the efforts made by the Scottish Government to support various sectors, but as I say, on that particular item, the hon. Gentleman will know as well as I do that it is a key ask of the industry in Scotland for the Scottish Government to follow suit with England and elsewhere. The hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn raised several points. Some were slightly out of the scope of the specific measures under discussion, including IT systems and other considerations, but I take on board what she says, as does HMRC, because there is a constant need to review and assess the scope of IT systems and so on. We do so on a regular basis; I spend a lot of time talking to HMRC about this, so I can assure the hon. Lady that the points that she raised are constantly under consideration. I will probably leave it at that.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

22. “This measure authorises the transfer of survivor benefits in collective money purchase pension schemes. This will ensure that Royal Mail Group, the first provider of a collective money purchase pension scheme, can launch its scheme as planned. It is a complicated title, but with a simple purpose. As a result of these changes, an employee of Royal Mail will be able to sign on to a CMP, with all the benefits, without the risk of transferring survivor benefits being put through as unauthorised transactions. I therefore commend the clause to the Committee.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

23. “Clause 24 makes further provision for collective money purchase arrangements. CMP arrangements are a new type of pension that have the benefit of pooling individuals’ pension pots to provide better incomes in retirement while limiting the liability of employers. These changes will enable the Government to authorise the transfer of benefits to a member’s beneficiaries, such as their dependants, in the unlikely event that a member dies while a CMP arrangement is being wound up. That will ensure that such transfers do not incur an unauthorised payment charge of 55%, and it will deliver the Government’s commitment to provide the correct tax outcome for CMP arrangements. The Pension Schemes Act 2021 introduced legislation to allow collective money purchase schemes to operate in the United Kingdom.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

24. “I will be very brief, because the clause is fairly straightforward. It provides for the use of abbreviations for a variety of Acts. For example, it provides for the use of “CTA 2009” as an abbreviation for the Corporation Tax Act 2009. I commend the clause to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. Clause 2 5 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 26 Short title Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

25. “The clause provides for the Bill to be known as the Finance (No. 2) Act 2024 upon Royal Assent. I commend it to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. Clause 2 6 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Question proposed, That the Chair do report the Bill to the House.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

26. “We have moved forward very quickly today. I thank everybody for their participation: you, Mrs Latham, all the officials in the House, the Clerks, and all those who have been working on the Bill at HMRC, HMT and other Government Departments. I repeat my thanks to the external stakeholders for their comments and to all those who have been involved in consultations. In particular, I thank the Chartered Institute of Taxation, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, and the Low Incomes Tax Reform Group for their contributions to this Committee, including in written form, and all those who have participated today. I look forward to the Bill progressing smoothly through its final stages. I thank everybody involved.”

    House of Commons21 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

27. “Clause 3 sets the default income tax rates at the same levels as the main rates—namely 20%, 40% and 45%—across the entire UK. These rates apply to the non-savings and non-dividend income of taxpayers who are not subject to the main rates of income tax or to Welsh or Scottish rates of income tax, such as non-UK resident individuals. The clause also sets the savings rates of income tax for all UK taxpayers, again at 20%, 40% and 45%. As I mentioned, income tax is a vital revenue stream for our public services, without which we could not fund our schools, hospitals, defence and more. It is important that we keep it at its current level.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

28. “Clause 2 sets the main income tax rates—namely the basic rate of 20%, the higher rate of 40% and the additional rate of 45%—for non-savings and non-dividend income of taxpayers in England and Northern Ireland. Those rates are set separately from those in clause 3, as the income tax rates for non-savings and non-dividend income, such as earnings from employment, are devolved to the Scottish and Welsh Governments, and are set by their respective Parliaments. The decision to separate savings and dividends from other forms of income was made as part of the devolution settlement. It ensures that the UK system works effectively and coherently, recognising that dividend and savings income is generally more mobile and generated across the UK, and has some interactions with corporation tax, which is not devolved.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

29. “All workers can now earn £1,000 a month before paying any tax, due to the significant increases to the national insurance starting threshold, which we changed in July 2022. Let me turn to the first four clauses of the Bill. Income tax is the largest source of Government revenue and helps to fund the UK’s schools, hospitals and defence, and other essential services we all rely on. In 2024-25, it is expected to raise more than £302 billion. Each year, the Government must legislate to charge and set rates of income tax, which is why we are all here today. Clauses 1 to 3 impose an income tax charge and set the rates of it for 2024-25. The rates are not changed by the Bill; rather, we are confirming that they will remain the same. Clause 1 imposes a charge on individuals to pay income tax for the year 2024-25.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

30. “It is an honour to open the debate. I will start by setting out how, because of the progress the Government have made, we have been able to cut taxes as part of our plan to reward work and grow the economy. The Government cut national insurance at both the autumn statement and the spring Budget and have made above-inflation increases to thresholds since 2010, with the basic rate threshold rising from £6,475 to £12,570 today. Taken together, those measures mean that an average worker on £35,400 in 2024-25 will save £1,500 more in personal taxes than they otherwise would have done. Due to the significant real-terms increases to the personal allowance, it is estimated that 1.8 million people will be taken out of income tax altogether by 2024-25, compared with the threshold rising in line with inflation from 2010-11.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

31. “We all know that, because of the level of intervention that we had to take, out of necessity, during the pandemic and in response to the cost of living challenges, Government intervention was far greater than any of us anticipated—to the tune of £400 billion in the pandemic and £100 billion for the cost of living challenges. That money has to be paid back, and I think most of our constituents know that. We have seen the same pattern right around the world, where tax levels have had to be higher out of necessity. That means that thresholds have not been able to move in the way that we would normally like. However, now that economic circumstances are changing, we have turned a corner and we are able to reduce taxes, such as for the 27 million people who will receive on average an extra £900 through the national insurance cuts.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

32. “By maintaining the current rates of income tax and the starting rate limit for savings thresholds, we will ensure that the highest earners contribute more to the revenue, helping the Government to take a balanced approach to revenue raising while still supporting vital public services.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

33. “The Government are committed to continuing to help people on all incomes and at all stages of life to save. The significant increase in the starting limit in 2015 means that the taxation arrangements for savings income remain generous, and the Government therefore believe that it is appropriate to retain the starting rate for savings at its existing value at this time. The Government are managing the public finances in a balanced and responsible way. Our approach to delivering fiscal sustainability is underpinned by fairness, with those on the highest incomes paying a larger share.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

34. “As well as benefiting from the starting rate for savings—whereby, as I have said, individuals with earned income of less than £17,507 can earn up to £5,000 in savings income free of tax—savers are supported by the personal savings allowance, which provides up to £1,000 of tax-free savings income for basic rate taxpayers. They can also continue to benefit from the annual ISA allowance of £20,000. Moreover, in the spring Budget 2024 the Government introduced the British ISA, which will provide a new allowance of £5,000 in addition to the existing ISA allowance, along with a new tax-free savings opportunity for people to invest in the UK. Taken together, those generous allowances mean that about 85% of savers pay no tax on their savings income.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

35. “That supports in particular people with low earned income, such as pensioners who are reliant on savings interest. The Government made significant changes to the starting rate for savings in 2015, when they raised the threshold to get the starting rate for savings from £2,880 to £5,000, and lowered the starting rate for savings from 10% to 0%. As many Members will be aware, the starting rate limit for savings must be legislated for each year to confirm the band of savings income to which it applies. Again, that is what we are doing today. This clause will ensure that the limit is held at this level. It ensures simplicity and fairness in the tax system, while maintaining a generous tax relief and supporting the public finances by taking fiscally responsible decisions.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

36. “We have also been able to return some money to taxpayers now that inflation is falling and the economy is improving, by reducing national insurance contributions. We have put money back into people’s pockets. We have prioritised tax cuts for those in work, and we believe that that is the best way to stimulate growth in the economy overall. Clause 4 continues the theme of maintaining the income tax arrangements by keeping the starting rate limit for savings at its current level of £5,000 for the 2024-25 tax year. Many colleagues may be familiar with this but some may not, so briefly by way of explanation, the starting rate for savings is an extra £5,000 tax-free allowance for interest from savings, specifically for individuals who have earned incomes of less than £17,570.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

37. “According to the OECD, the UK has some of the most generous starting allowances for income tax and social security contributions in the OECD, and the most generous in the G7—more generous than in France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan and the US. According to the OECD, in the United Kingdom the average single worker faced a net average tax rate of 23.7% in 2023, compared with the OECD average of 24.9%. In other words, in the United Kingdom, the take-home pay of an average single worker after tax and benefits was 76.3% of their gross wage, compared with the OECD average of 75.1%. I have talked a lot of statistics, but what they mean is more money in people’s pockets to spend as they wish—a fundamental Conservative philosophy.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

38. “Income tax is fair: those with the most contribute the most. The income tax system is highly progressive, with different rates of tax sitting above an internationally high personal allowance. The top 5% of income tax payers are projected to pay nearly half of all income tax in 2023-24. The top 1% are projected to pay more than 28% of income tax. Thanks to the personal allowance, almost a quarter of individuals will not pay income tax at all in 2024-25. It is important to note that the percentage paid by the top earners is greater than it was under the last Labour Government. In other words, the tax system is more progressive under the Conservatives. Income tax is also internationally competitive.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

39. “However, now that we are back to growth and on a firmer footing, the economy has turned a corner, and we are able to reward the hard work of the British public by reducing taxation. We are doing that in the form of income tax cuts. As the Chancellor and the Prime Minister have said on multiple occasions, we wish to continue in that direction of travel. As I said, people should look at their pay packets. I recognise that it is one thing to talk in the Chamber about implementing laws, but people will now see that in their pay packets in a meaningful way. An average worker on £35,400 will be £900 better off as a result of the national insurance cuts. That is a meaningful amount for constituents right across the country, including those in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency. Another principle of taxation is fairness.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

40. “No. I advise the hon. Member and others to look at their wage slip from a few months ago—say, in December last year. They will see a direct impact because of the national insurance changes that we made in January and again in April. People will see that they are paying less national insurance than in the past. That is transparently and clearly a tax cut. We are able to reduce taxation because the direction of travel is changing. Taxes have increased across the whole of the western world. Our tax level is projected to increase to about 37%, compared with around 39% in Germany, around 42% in Italy and around 46% in France. This is a phenomenon whereby Governments have had to intervene and spend more money and, as an obvious consequence, they have had to increase taxation to a greater level than anticipated or desired.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

41. “Those on the new full state pension will therefore be £900 per year better off. That £900 figure is significant, because of course that is the average amount by which 27 million employees will benefit from the national insurance cut: £900 additional for many pensioners and £900 additional for 27 million workers. I think most people will agree that is fair.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

42. “I thank the Members who have spoken for their contributions to the debate. As we have discussed, the Government have shown their commitment to keeping taxes low in order to support people to keep more of what they earn. That is why we have nearly doubled the income tax personal allowance since 2010, ensuring that some of the lowest earners do not pay income tax, while also benefiting higher-rate taxpayers. The Government have shown that we are also committed to ensuring that older people can live with the dignity and respect they deserve, and the state pension is the foundation of state support for them. Thanks to the Government honouring our commitment to the triple lock, the basic and new state pensions increased by 8.5% this April—one of the largest ever cash increases in the state pension.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

43. “(3) For comparative purposes, the review must take account of— (a) equivalent actual figures to those in subsection (2)(a) and (b) for the tax years 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24, and (b) equivalent projected figures to those in subsection (2)(a) and (b) for the tax years 2025-26, 2026-27 and 2027-28.”— (James Murray.) This new clause requires a review of how many people will be liable to pay income tax at 20% and 40%, and would compare figures for the current tax year with those for the three preceding and three subsequent tax years. Brought up, and read the First time. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

44. “I ask that the clauses we have put forward should stand part of the Bill. Question put and agreed to. Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 2 to 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill. New Clause 1 Review of impact of section 2 “(1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer must, within three months of this Act being passed, publish a review of the expected impact of section 2 of this Act. (2) The review must include analysis setting out the number of individual taxpayers facing a marginal tax rate in the tax year 2024-25 of— (a) the basic rate of 20%, and (b) the higher rate of 40%.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

45. “Moreover, it is utterly hypocritical, because when we had the NI debate not so long ago, the Opposition spokespeople, the Opposition Front Benchers and the Leader of the Opposition said that they supported our NI cuts, but when it came to a vote they did not. That should make the British people ask: why would the Opposition say one thing and do another. First, I should say that is not a surprise to me, but could it also be that at some future point they might hope to be in a situation where they could reverse that decision and say, “We did not actually vote for it, after all”? Again, they should be straight with the British public. I thank hon. Members for their contributions—some more than others. The debates will continue, but I hope that I have explained why we do not accept the new clauses.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

46. “Welfare spending is £260 billion. NHS spending is £160 billion. That is far higher than the total amount paid for by NI. So to try to suggest some direct correlation and say that reducing NI puts pensions at risk all of a sudden is either economically utterly incompetent or it is sheer scaremongering—neither are particularly attractive attributes in somebody aspiring to be in government. I therefore hope that he will have the decency to take that back. As I said, this scaremongering of pensioners, from the whole Opposition Front Bench, is despicable, although we can perhaps expect it from the Opposition.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

47. “I could go on, but I will not detain the Committee too much longer, Dame Eleanor. If the hon. Gentleman could recognise just one or a few of those success stories, he might have greater confidence in the UK economy and be able to talk it up. Anybody aspiring to be in government must champion the UK around the world, instead of talking us down. Otherwise, the impact they would have on investment in the UK economy is appalling. Let me deal with the scaremongering in what the hon. Member for Ealing North and others have been declaring in the past few days about national insurance and the impact on pensions—I found that behaviour deplorable. It could be complete scaremongering because, as we have said, he is not aware of how NI impacts health and pensions. The amount of money spent on pensions is about £130 billion.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

48. “Gentleman should also recognise that since the Conservatives came to power in 2010, the UK economy has generated an average of 800 jobs per day. Since Brexit, the UK has gone up the global export league tables, from seventh to fourth. We are the second largest exporter of services in the world and have reached record levels of service exports recently. We have overtaken France to become the eighth largest manufacturer in the world. We have the third largest tech economy, after the United States and China. We have the largest film, TV and creative industries sector in Europe, and one of the world’s leading biotech and life sciences industries—again, it is the largest in Europe. We are leading the world in renewables, with the first, second, third and fourth biggest offshore wind farms in the world.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

49. “After all, the UK is doing incredibly well. The hon. Member for Ealing North was right to recognise that all of our constituents are facing extraordinarily difficult times, but he is wrong to believe that is something unique to the UK economy; it is as a result of the pandemic and the cost of living challenges, which have had an impact right the way around the world. Given the extraordinary circumstances that the whole developed world has found itself in, what is extraordinary is how the UK has performed so well. I wish he would recognise the great optimism and the potential future of the UK economy. For example, the International Monetary Fund has forecast that this country will grow faster than Germany, France, Italy and Japan over the next few years to 2028-29. The hon.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

50. “I think the hon. Gentleman just dug even deeper there. As I say, I like him but I do not always like what he says. On income tax, I do not think that everybody in Scotland would share his enthusiasm for the Scottish tax system, given that the thresholds and rates are higher, to the tune of up to 5%. Turning to my opposite number, the hon. Member for Ealing North (James Murray), I will try to avoid the déjà vu all over again—we seem to have the same debate again and again. Yet again we have heard a Labour party spokesman constantly talking Britain down, as if we are in some declinist environment of failure upon failure. That is not a characterisation of the UK, its economy or our constituents that I recognise. I wish he had greater optimism and enthusiasm, and could support the UK economy and the workers to a greater degree.”

    House of Commons8 May 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →