Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hollis of Heigham (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 July 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.
Pensions Bill
If someone had a pot of a couple of million pounds and was seeking not to annuitise it, the tax element in it, which might be at least a third and perhaps a half, would go back to the taxpayer. It seems to me that the consequences of the noble Lord’s argument are the reverse of the implications.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 703 c1016
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Companies Annuities Competition Administrative delays Equality Health Eligibility Gender Income tax Divorce Insolvency Discrimination Financial assistance scheme Index linking Private sector Workplace pensions Pensions Lump sum payments Pension Protection Fund PAYE Scotland State retirement pensions Regulation Taxation Retirement State earnings related pension scheme Pensions Regulator Private equity Civil partnerships dissolution State second pension Impact assessments
- Legislation
- Pensions Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:10:30 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_492099
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_492099
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_492099