Proceeding contribution from Greg Knight (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 14 June 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Rating (Empty Properties) Bill.
Rating (Empty Properties) Bill
So far my hon. Friend has taken me with him, and I am minded to support the amendment. I agree that exemptions should be made clear in the Bill. However, I am slightly puzzled by the wording of paragraph (k). Why should a company that is being wound up voluntarily be exempt? The owners of a company may well wind it up voluntarily to avoid paying their dues under the Bill, then form a new company with a different name and effectively continue to trade as before.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 461 c905
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Clubs Charities Ancient monuments Building alterations Cemeteries Brownfield sites Archaeological sites Community centres Bombs Electricity generation Empty property Exemptions Farms Industry Insolvency Land use Floods Fires Planning permission Local government finance Rates and rating Business rates Listed buildings Microgeneration Small businesses Tax allowances Sports Tenants Rents Regeneration Vandalism Local Government Finance Funding Changes Independent Inquiry Land Use Planning Review
- Legislation
- Rating (Empty Properties) Bill 2006-07
- Non-domestic Rating (Unoccupied Property) Regulations 1989
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:51:02 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_403089
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_403089
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_403089