Lucy Rigby
MP for Northampton North · Labour · United Kingdom
“The Prime Minister confirmed earlier today that we will bring the welfare bill down as soon as possible. I am very happy to confirm that. As the Chancellor said yesterday, when it comes to public services we will insist on reform, prioritisation and value for money.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are reforming welfare, and the Prime Minister has made it clear today— [ Interruption. ] The welfare Budget ballooned under the Conservative party. The Prime Minister has been very clear today that the welfare bill will come down. As I have said, the contrast between our approach and the Conservatives’ could not be clearer.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for their contributions to this Budget debate. It is an honour to respond on behalf of the Government.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Friends the Members for Buckingham and Bletchley (Callum Anderson) and for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist), have rightly emphasised the importance of our commitment to fiscal responsibility, which underwrites every promise this Government make to the British people.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith), with not so much a pinch of salt, but a whole bucket of it, because not only is he the architect of the mini-Budget, but he maintained just a few weeks ago that the mini-Budget, as the Defence Secretary said, contained lots of good things.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I can. On that commitment to sound finances, our plan is to double down on the conditions that will allow for the growth that will drive this country’s future prosperity. We are determined that Britain will be an even better place to start a business, to scale it and then to stay.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
760 held · 619 searchable for Lucy Rigby. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 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.
“That has evolved into the prohibition and the regulations that now require the approval of Parliament. In the light of stakeholder concerns around the threshold to issue regulations, HMRC introduced the taxpayer harms test to limit what arrangements are caught by the measure, ensuring that legitimate advisers are not in scope of the measure. The marketing test was originally drafted as “could be marketed”, but following consultation it was amended to “likely to be”, precisely to narrow the power.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the consultation with industry, we have consulted extensively on these measures. What was originally described as the universal stop notice was introduced as part of a 12-week consultation by HMRC in March 2025. A further eight-week consultation was held on the draft legislation after it was published on L day. The initial consultation received 37 written responses from a range of stakeholders—primarily those in the tax and legal sectors—while a further 19 responses were received in response to the L day consultations. Importantly, three key changes were made in response to those stakeholder concerns, including the rule of law concerns given voice to by the Law Society regarding universal stop notices and giving HMRC legislative power that ultimately carries a criminal offence.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The shadow City Minister gives voice to a legitimate concern, and I was about to come on to some of the ways we are tackling it. As I said before lunch, the Exchequer Secretary has asked HMRC officials to work with stakeholders in developing the fine detail everyone wants to see in the guidance on how this prohibition will work in practice. The power in clause 156 will allow HMRC to make regulations only where arrangements have been or are likely to be marketed, where they are unlikely to work and where they are likely to cause harm to taxpayers. That limits HMRC’s scope to proscribe arrangements. The power is not at all intended so that HMRC can ban advisers from recommending tax positions they think are right, based on all the facts of the law, but with which HMRC disagrees.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman’s concern goes to the point that I have addressed twice now, once before lunch and once after. The measures are not intended to be directed at legitimate tax advisers who operate to a high standard but make a genuine mistake. By virtue of the consultations, the changes to the proposed legislation and the fact that detailed draft guidance will be issued, I hope that hon. Members will be comfortable with the intention behind the legislation and the impact that it will have.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will do exactly that, although hon. Members will have to forgive me because I do not have the notes in front of me. It is right to say that promoter action notices are legal notices that require businesses to stop providing goods or services where those services are used in the promotion of avoidance. Of course, such a notice can be issued only in the case of a breach of a stop notice or if the prohibition on promoting tax avoidance—also included in the Bill—also applies. Question put and agreed to. Clause 156 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 157 to 162 ordered to stand part of the Bill . Clause 163 Certification of promoters Question proposed , That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To conclude, these changes, recommended by the IMF, align the fiscal framework with the Government’s commitment to hold a single major annual fiscal event. Taken together with the larger buffer against the fiscal rules at the last Budget, this measure will support stability for households and businesses right across the country.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The OBR will continue to produce two five-year forecasts for the economy and public finances each year, but it will now be required to assess performance against the fiscal rules only at the autumn Budget. The spring forecast will now provide an interim update on the economy and public finances, and the Government will not normally respond with fiscal policy, unless there is a significant change in economic conditions. Where there are small fluctuations between Budgets, it is right that the Government take fiscal decisions in the round only at the Budget. This will in no way impact the Government’s adherence to the fiscal rules, which remain iron-clad. They will continue to be assessed at every Budget and the Government will always meet them.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The clause will improve the fiscal cycle in support of the Government’s commitment to having one major annual fiscal event. In line with recommendations made by the International Monetary Fund, the Office for Budget Responsibility will now assess the fiscal rules only once per year, at the Budget, when the Government will set out their fiscal strategy. That will help create a more predictable framework and strengthen economic and fiscal stability. The clause will reduce the minimum number of occasions on which the OBR must prepare an assessment of performance against the fiscal rules from two to one in each financial year. That will apply from the current financial year onwards.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The OBR is, of course, critically important. The best demonstration of why is the hon. Gentleman’s party’s previous Government. He referred consistently to the Chancellor having to repair the public finances, but seemingly with a huge amount of brass neck. He ought to be asking himself why the Chancellor needed to repair the public finances. The answer is of course that after 14 years of his party being in government, the public finances were in dire need of repair. Question put and agreed to . Clause 251 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill . Clause 252 Data-gathering Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Fourthly, they will place obligations on data holders to collect, verify and report specific tax identifiers, such as national insurance numbers, which will help HMRC to improve the amount of data that it can match to existing customer records. Fifthly, they will reform the penalty regime to ensure that data holders comply with their obligations. HMRC thinks that the measure will cost around £50 million to implement; however, the OBR has certified that it will raise £845 million in additional tax revenue from 2028 to 2031.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 252 and schedule 22 introduce new provisions for HMRC to acquire improved data from specific data holders to be used for risk assessment, tax administration and compliance. The improved data will help taxpayers to get their tax right first time while closing the tax gap. First, the clause and schedule will introduce standing reporting obligations, replacing the current manual notices issued to data holders. Secondly, they will increase the frequency and improve the timeliness with which data holders report data, bringing data reporting closer to real time so that HMRC can use it proactively to help customers get their tax right first time. Thirdly, they will standardise the format for how HMRC receives the data, reducing errors and improving efficiency when ingesting it into HMRC systems.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Bill is clear that the improved data that HMRC will collect as a result of the measure will be strictly limited to the purposes for which it is necessary for HMRC to discharge its tax functions. He will know that HMRC has a statutory duty of confidentiality to protect taxpayers’ information. It can share data only where there is an express legal provision to do so provided by Parliament. As to the wider implication in the hon. Member’s question, I can assure him that the Government take data privacy extremely seriously. As such, this measure is compliant with all legal data obligations, and HMRC continues to work with the industry, and legal and data experts, to ensure that all relevant requirements are met.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the shadow City Minister’s point about people who are less au fait with digital means, I can reassure him that people will be able to provide information to HMRC in all the traditional ways. Indeed, the Exchequer Secretary referred earlier to some of the recent improvements that have been made to HMRC’s phone lines. With regard to the points made by the hon. Member for Newton Abbot, HMRC already receives bulk data from third parties, such as financial institutions, relating to interest-bearing products, and card sales data from card-acquiring services. This measure will improve and modernise the way HMRC acquires that data from third parties, and will have all the benefits I have just described.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 254 adds new powers for HMRC to create regulations for exemptions from Making Tax Digital for income tax. It allows HMRC to cancel existing requirements if an exemption is granted after the tax year has started and to issue directions enabling further exemptions. Clause 255 adds new powers for HMRC to make a certain set of regulations. Clause 256 is consequential to changes introduced in clause 255. Clause 257 will allow HMRC to move customers to digital by default more easily, and clause 258 enables HMRC to require digital contact details, such as email addresses or mobile phone numbers, from customers using HMRC digital services at secure digital touchpoints. These changes provide the legislative basis for the Making Tax Digital for income tax programme.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clauses 253 to 256 amend existing legislation to digitalise and improve the accuracy of tax reporting through HMRC’s Making Tax Digital for income tax programme. Clauses 257 and 258 make changes to enable HMRC to modernise how it communicates with customers digitally. Clauses 253 to 255 amend schedule A1 to the Taxes Management Act 1970 to support new digital record keeping and reporting obligations for sole traders and landlords who pay income tax. Clause 253 is a procedural one. It sets out some exemptions and defines key terms for later regulations. It clarifies that a “relevant person” is an individual with taxable income, a “relevant partnership” includes at least one individual partner, and “relevant activity” refers to business activities that may incur income tax.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 253 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 254 to 258 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 259 Penalty points and late submission penalties (power to cancel etc)”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This measure is designed to target customers who are already using HMRC’s digital services, and it is important to important to bear that in mind. More broadly, HMRC’s customer service is improving. It is improving its IT systems and investing in the digital aspects, which have higher approval rates. As the Exchequer Secretary said earlier, some of these matters are trending in the right direction, albeit I accept that there is further to go. I welcome the support for these measures from the hon. Member for Wyre Forest. I am sorry if I was not effusive enough for him; I shall be effusive now. He will be shocked to hear me reiterate that we keep all tax policy under review, and that statement continues to apply to the matters he raised in relation to this clause. Question put and agreed to.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member for Maidenhead raises a series of important points on financial and digital inclusion, which are matters close to my heart. He will have spotted the publication of the financial inclusion strategy a couple of months ago, which I hope contains many measures that he welcomes on the matters he was raising. Older customers and those with certain disabilities are more likely to be digitally excluded or digitally assisted and may be disproportionately reliant on paper correspondence. Safeguards will be included to ensure that those groups can continue accessing paper communications if specifically needed, with a clear and simple opt-out process and ongoing support through non-digital channels.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The clause also gives the Government the power to amend the penalties by regulation in future. I commend clauses 259 to 262 to the Committee.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That ensures that the consequences of not paying income tax or capital gains tax by the statutory due date are fair and consistent. Clause 262 will increase the penalties for taxpayers who are late in filing their corporation tax return for the first time since 1998, as part of the Government’s work to close the tax gap and make more money available to fund vital public services. Specifically, clause 262 will increase the flat-rate penalty for a company that fails to file its company tax return on time from £100 to £200. If the return is more than three months late, the flat-rate penalty of £200 will increase to £400, replacing the initial penalty. If there are three successive failures, the flat-rate penalties of £500 and £1,000 will be increased to £1,000 and £2,000 respectively.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The late submission penalty regime already offers leniency for those occasionally submitting late, as they would receive a penalty point, rather than an immediate financial penalty. Customers who believe that they should not be in self-assessment should contact HMRC as soon as possible, so that they can be taken out of the system and avoid any unnecessary penalties. A question was raised about when lower income taxpayers will move into the system: it will apply to all taxpayers in IT self-assessment from the 2027-28 tax year. Clause 261 makes technical changes to ensure that HMRC is consistent when penalising late payment of amounts due, following the decision of a tribunal. It will enable a late payment penalty to be charged in the circumstances I have just described.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He is right to say that moving to a points-based system is better: it ensures that those who make the occasional mistake do not face financial penalties, while those who persistently fail to meet obligations will still face them. Late payment penalties are more proportionate to the amount of tax owed and the time taken to pay. Amendment 50, as the shadow Exchequer Secretary outlined, seeks to stop customers being penalised for late filing, even if they do not have a tax liability. We reject that amendment. The late submission penalty regime is intended to underpin the legal obligation to submit returns on time, whether there is tax to be paid or not, and amendment 50 is entirely contrary to that intention. The tax return helps HMRC to administer the tax system effectively, and to protect the Exchequer from error and fraud.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will speak to clauses 259 to 262 in brief terms, and I will then speak to amendment 50. The clauses make changes to ensure that penalties are fairer and more proportionate across the tax system. They also make sure that HMRC is consistent when penalising late payment of amounts due, following the decision of a tribunal, and increase the penalties for taxpayers who are late in filing their corporation tax return. I welcome the shadow Exchequer Secretary’s support for these changes. He points out the unfairness now, but I gently say to him that the Conservatives did nothing to change the system to make it fairer during the 14 years that they had the opportunity to do so.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 267 will ensure that HMRC can request information from customers; it sets out the potential consequences of a clearance being revoked. Clause 268 will allow HMRC to revoke an advance tax clearance and charge a penalty in circumstances in which false or misleading information has been provided. Clause 269 will allow HMRC to publish notices governing the administration of the service. Clause 270 sets out that the Government may make adjustments by statutory instrument to ensure the effective functioning of the service. Finally, clause 271 sets out and defines certain terms used in the advance tax clearance provision. I commend the clauses to the Committee.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The clause confirms that the person undertaking the project, or a person who controls the project, such as a consortium member, joint venture partner or partner in a partnership that shares control, qualifies as an applicant. Clause 264 sets out the extent to which HMRC is bound to maintain the tax treatment agreed in the clearance for five years, unless material facts change. I should point out that the clearance will not be binding on the customer. The clause binds HMRC against changing its interpretation of the law, but not against a change in case law or the will of Parliament by changes in legislation. Clause 265 simply provides for advance tax clearances issued by HMRC to be extended past the initial five-year period. Clause 266 will provide for modification or revocation of an advance tax clearance issued by HMRC.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“These clauses introduce the advance tax certainty service for major investment projects, which will be launched in July 2026. The service will provide a binding decision on how the UK’s tax rules will apply to a project before material investment has taken place. Clause 263 will give HMRC the power to issue decisions, known as clearances, about how corporation tax, VAT, stamp duty, PAYE and the construction industry scheme will apply to investors undertaking large investment projects in the UK. The threshold for investors to be accepted into the service is expenditure of £1 billion in the UK over the lifetime of a project.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 263 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause s 264 to 271 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 272 Cryptoasset reporting: users and controlling persons resident in the UK Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The impetus behind the series of changes made by these clauses is to implement the corporate tax road map, as the shadow Exchequer Secretary recognises, with the aim of supporting inward investment and helping investors to invest in the UK with confidence. As for the £1 billion threshold, the Government will assess the performance of the service when it has been in operation for one year and will consider lowering the threshold as part of that review. To answer the remainder of the shadow Exchequer Secretary’s questions directly, there is no limit on the number of extensions that can be sought or granted. Once again, he will be thrilled to know that—as is so often my answer to his questions—there is already draft guidance on gov.uk to add to the draft guidance that he has committed to reading this evening. Question put and agreed to.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 273 is a maintenance provision for clause 272 that allows the Treasury to lay further secondary legislation, if required, to maintain the domestic reporting legislation under the reporting framework. The clauses legislate to provide HMRC with reporting framework information on UK-resident customers reported by UK cryptoasset businesses, which will streamline reporting. I therefore commend the clauses to the Committee.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clauses 272 and 273 will make changes to ensure that HMRC receives information under the cryptoasset reporting framework from UK cryptoasset businesses about their UK-resident customers. This will streamline reporting for businesses, which will be able to use the same HMRC reporting portal for both their UK and non-UK resident customers. The changes made by clause 272 will require UK cryptoasset businesses to report data about their UK customers to HMRC in a consistent manner. That will streamline reporting and ensure that HMRC will have standardised data on all UK taxpayers in countries, including the UK, that have implemented the cryptoasset reporting framework. That data will consist of details of the taxpayer and aggregated data concerning their transactions involving cryptoassets.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If they do, they will be reported under the common standard; if they do not, they will be reportable under the reporting framework. Clarification on these matters has been reflected in HMRC guidance and stems from the OECD FAQs on this area. I could talk about the extent to which tokenised financial products need to be reported under CARF, a position of which those involved with traditional financial products—TradFi, as I believe they are called by those in the game—have been aware for some time. We have engaged extensively with industry and with the OECD on the subject, and this has been reflected in HMRC guidance. Q uestion put and agreed to. Clause 272 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 273 ordered to stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the shadow EST’s interest in these matters. The DL Committee debate to which he referred was indeed an interesting one. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] I am glad that other Members agree. The matters that the hon. Member and I discussed in that debate included the Financial Conduct Authority’s supervisory powers vis-à-vis qualifying cryptoassets and indeed the definition of qualifying stablecoin. The matters addressed by the clauses are slightly different. I can speak to the definitions, but this is a slightly different context: it is about CARF, the cryptoasset reporting framework. Stablecoins are cryptoassets for the purposes of the legislation. They can be a specified electronic money product: they would meet that definition if they meet the criteria set out in the legislation.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Innovation is a key driver of long-term economic growth, higher productivity and improved living standards. That is why this Government are investing more in R&D and why we are committed to maintaining the generosity of R&D tax reliefs. We remain open to new and innovative debt instruments and we review options regularly, but clearly new instruments need to meet a range of criteria, including value for money.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to the hon. Member for his question. Indeed, he and I have discussed this issue previously. We are due to meet to discuss it later this month, and I am very much looking forward to that discussion.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend raises an important point. This Government are investing an extra £29 billion in our national health service. I would be happy to meet him to discuss it further.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Maidenhead to withdraw new clause 28. In any event, it should be rejected. New clause 29 asks the Chancellor to lay a report before the House within the next 12 months assessing the impact on small and medium-sized enterprises of the changes made under clause 35. The Government monitor the impact of all changes made to existing tax reliefs. However, publishing a report on the change introduced by clause 35 within the next 12 months would not be reasonable as the first full tax year of these changes is the tax year 2026-27, so HMRC will not have complete information to assess their impact. New clause 29 should therefore be rejected. In addition to rejecting new clauses 28 and 29, I commend clause 35 to the Committee.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Turning to the non-Government amendments, new clause 28 asks His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to assess the potential benefits of establishing a digital application process for taxpayers seeking to pay capital gains tax by instalments following disposals to employee ownership trusts. The facility to pay CGT in instalments is a long-standing feature of the tax code and is well understood by both taxpayers and HMRC. The process for applying to pay by instalments is clearly set out within HMRC guidance and applications are dealt with swiftly once they have been received by HMRC. My officials have met representatives from the employee ownership sector to provide bespoke guidance on how these instalment payment provisions apply to disposals to EOTs. That engagement continues. I therefore ask the hon.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Importantly, the Employee Ownership Association has stated that the changes we are making are not such as to alter the fundamental strength and purpose of the employee ownership trust model, while also recognising that the previous level of relief, or the level of relief as it stands, was hard to sustain when set against the rapidly escalating fiscal cost. On the comments made by the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the hon. Member for Maidenhead, I set out the reasons why we reject new clauses 28 and 29. I maintain the position of rejecting those and maintaining clause 35 as it stands. Question put and agreed to. Clause 35 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 36 Anti-avoidance: collective investment scheme reconstructions Question proposed , That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To the comments from the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest, it is important to bear in mind that on the changes we are making to EOTs, even post these changes, the relief that will be on offer remains more generous than for many other options and deeds, such as business asset disposal relief. Of course, the fiscal climate is relevant to the changes we are making. He referred to the point at which the last Government introduced this relief, but as I said, the cost of the relief as a whole is projected to rise to £2 billion by 2029-30 without the action that we are taking. As I said, the fiscal climate is extremely relevant when looking at £2 billion of relief.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The amendments introduced by the clauses will allow HMRC to address situations where arrangements have been added to otherwise commercial transactions that reduce or eliminate, rather than just defer, a tax charge, allowing them to be more effectively challenged. The rule has been updated so that it affects only the shareholders who benefit directly from the avoidance. Where HMRC agrees that there is no avoidance and the reorganisation is carried out within 60 days of the Budget announcement or if HMRC’s decision is later, the current legislation will apply. For those reasons I commend clauses 36 to 38 to the Committee.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clauses 36 to 38 make changes to the CGT anti-avoidance provisions that apply to company share exchanges and reconstructions, or the reconstruction rules, as they are known. Clause 36 revises the collective investment scheme reconstruction anti-avoidance rule to align with modern provisions with a similar purpose. Clause 37 revises the share exchanges and company reconstruction anti-avoidance rule to align with modern provisions with a similar purpose, too. Clause 38 does exactly the same. The changes made by these clauses, which take effect from Budget day, modernise the anti-avoidance rule so that it focuses directly on arrangements where the purpose, or one of the purposes, is the avoidance of tax.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 36 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 37 and 38 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 39 Incorporation relief: requirement to claim Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the support that was expressed, on the whole, by the shadow Economic Secretary to the Treasury. I suspect that that support is born from a recognition that we really do need to make the changes. Recent court decisions have shown that the rules as they stand, which date back to the ’70s, do not work as intended, especially when the avoidance carried out is a smaller part of a larger commercial reconstruction. The main effect of the rules will be to discourage the minority—and it is very much a minority—who would otherwise seek to avoid tax. It is about protecting our tax base from abuse for the benefit of the majority of taxpayers who apply the rules correctly. For those reasons, I truly believe that the clauses strengthen the protection against avoidance and will catch tax avoiders. Question put and agreed to .”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 39 makes a change to incorporation relief for CGT, requiring taxpayers to make a claim for relief and, as a result, improving the data available to HMRC to undertake analysis and compliance activity. Specifically, the change will mean that taxpayers need to make a claim for incorporation relief on their self-assessment return. That will apply to transfers of a business on or after 6 April 2026, and it will allow HMRC to monitor the relief and tackle avoidance more effectively, protecting revenue and helping to close the tax gap, with an additional £225 million expected to be collected over the scorecard period.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“While it is important to be clear about the fact that the additional data is being collected, the details required from taxpayers are brief, and that goes to the question of the additional burden or, indeed, lack thereof. They are brief details of the type of business, the tax calculations for the assets disposed of, and the value of the shares received for the business. The information HMRC requests will be used in analysis and compliance activity, which will tackle abuse of this relief for the benefit of the majority of taxpayers who apply the rules correctly. The point on awareness was fairly raised. I can confirm that new guidance will be provided alongside the self-assessment return. Question put and agreed to. Clause 39 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The effect of the changes made by clause 41 is that investors are not required to make or deliver a return in order to claim relief in respect of a particular disposal. In fact, the clause reduces administrative burdens by clarifying when non-resident companies and individuals have to notify HMRC of a disposal. I therefore commend these clauses to the Committee.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clauses 40 and 41 make various changes to the capital gains rules that apply to disposals of UK land and property by non-UK resident persons. Turning first to clause 40, the changes that are being made have been in effect since Budget day and ensure that, for the purposes of the non-resident capital gains legislation, each cell in a cell company is looked at individually for the purposes of the property richness rules. That will prevent the use and ongoing exploitation of such entities to avoid the non-resident capital gains rules and will protect the tax base. Clause 41 makes changes to the rules for non-resident capital gains in respect of double taxation treaties and the requirement to claim double taxation relief, and it also clarifies some unclear terminology.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 41 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 42 Abolition of notional tax credit on distributions received by non-UK residents Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the “hurrah” from the shadow Minister. On his latter point about double taxation treaties, as he will know, many of the agreements were negotiated before the introduction of the non-resident capital gains regime. As treaties come up for renegotiation, as they do, or as we negotiate new treaties, we will seek to include a provision in the capital gains article to allow the UK to exercise our domestic taxing provisions in full. On the shadow Minister’s point about cell companies and the extent to which they are used to avoid tax, there is anecdotal evidence that such structures have been created to help individuals avoid paying tax on gains made through the disposal of UK land and property, and the changes to the rules seek to cure that. Question put and agreed to. Clause 40 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 42 abolishes the notional tax credit available to non-UK residents on UK company dividends. That credit no longer serves a purpose, under the modern dividend taxation system, and the change brings non-UK residents in line with UK residents, who do not receive the notional tax credit. It will impact fewer than 1,000 non-UK resident individuals who have UK dividend income and other UK income, such as property or partnership income, a year. The clause removes the outdated notional tax credit for non-UK residents receiving UK dividends, aligning their position with that of UK residents. I commend the clause to the Committee.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗