Proceeding contribution from Brooks Newmark (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 28 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance Bill.
Finance Bill
My right hon. Friend makes an excellent point; the Government's lack of consistency bedevils many businesses, both small and large. The Government argue that they support targeted reliefs, and I look forward to the Minister's explanation of the justification. We addressed the issue last year, while I still had the pleasure of serving on the Treasury Committee. Our sceptical conclusion bears repeating now:"““It is not clear whether measures such as the increase in the R&D tax credit and the introduction of the Annual Investment Allowance will have the desired beneficial impact on investment levels by small companies.””" Instead of committing to an escalation of the small companies rate, the Government should take a step back and take stock of their continuing to pull in different directions. Commercial decisions in small businesses are still being influenced by legitimate concerns about the benefits or disincentives of incorporation, and the dust has not yet settled. The Government occasionally manage to evoke a sense of continuity in their fiscal policies. For example, let us consider the following quotation from Malcolm Dunn, writing in the journal Taxation:"““It is a bizarre form of socialism which leaves the rich virtually unaffected but hits the poorest the hardest””." I do not want to presage too much of tonight's debate, so I should make it clear that he was writing in 2004 about the introduction of the minimum 19 per cent. rate for non-corporate distributions. The comparison between that and other poorly timed simplifications with disproportionate effects bears noting, and we should not forget that the increase in the small companies rate came in very handy when the Prime Minister was trying to balance the books after he cut the main rate from 30 to 28 per cent. as part of his pre-election stunt. The proposals in clause 5 are at least part of a three-year escalation and businesses can be grateful that they have been given a time line for increases in their further tax burdens, but we are still talking about tax increases. I speak in favour of amendments Nos. 1 and 2 in the hope that the Government will think again about committing to escalating the small companies rate to 22 per cent. by next year. The original decision was made both in more benign economic conditions than those today and by a different Chancellor. What is more, the Government have shown in the past few months that they have a firm track record in only one respect: the rapid reversal of fiscal policy. I hope that I can encourage the Minister to think again, if only because the third time is the charm, and to come back to the House on Report with a small companies rate that does not increase the burdens falling on small businesses that are ill equipped to deal with them. If the Government are looking to do something that might restore the trust of the small business community, they need look no further than a freeze on the current rate and a moratorium on fresh uncertainties.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 475 c36
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Companies Capital gains tax Corporation tax Bingo Amusement arcades Licensing Investment Income tax Gaming machines Pensioners Small businesses Tax allowances Taxation Tax rates and bands
- Legislation
- Finance Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 23:58:12 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_467491
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_467491
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_467491