Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mark Hoban (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 12 May 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance Bill.


Finance Bill

Indeed—we literally have all night. Let me continue to make the case for why it is important for us to deal with the issue. As I was saying, our economy is an open one. Businesses choose to locate here; we have few barriers to prevent them from doing that, and few that prevent them from moving offshore. Because we are so open, we cannot tax businesses on the basis that they have no choice but to stay here. The evidence has shown that businesses move. During the period covering the last Finance Bill, when we debated the same issue, companies such as United Business Media, Shire, Kraft, Experian and Google had moved outside the UK. To pick up on the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham, since then, Beazley, a Lloyd's of London insurer; WPP, the advertising giant; Regus, which provides office services; Henderson, a major fund manager; and Charter, an engineering company have all done the same. The fact that they constitute a broad spectrum of businesses from a wide range of industries is telling. We have had warnings. Richard Lambert, the director general of the CBI, said:""In today's world of global markets, companies have many more choices to make about where to invest their capital and their talent than they did in the past. Business tax is one of the most important considerations that firms have to take into account, and it is easily measured…business leaders believe the UK's corporate tax regime is more burdensome than it was five years ago, and that this is making the UK less attractive as an international business location.""The worry is that on current trends our position relative to other developed economies will deteriorate further over the next two or three years."" Mr. Lambert made that statement in 2006. Time moved on, but the CBI returned to the same point last year in its publication "UK business tax: a compelling case for change", which concluded:""Comparatively high tax rates, increasing complexity and a lack of certainty are all contributing to declining tax competitiveness."" The report called for a more strategic approach to corporation tax. So the voices making the point are not only those of Conservative Members; people in industry are also making it. Richard Lambert touched on the point raised by the hon. Member for North-West Leicestershire (David Taylor): the issue is not only the rate but other aspects of the tax regime. I remind Members of what Mr. Lambert said:""increasing complexity and a lack of certainty are all contributing to declining tax competitiveness."" This theme has emerged elsewhere—it does not just come from the CBI. Last year, the City of London corporation published a report, "The Impact of Taxation on Financial Services Business Location Decisions", which discussed how "sticky" London is with regard to business staying put in spite of the tax regime, not because of it. It compared the UK's corporate tax regime with those of other financial jurisdictions, and found that the UK had among the worst scores in two categories: "Certainty of Interpretation" and "Attitude and Approach". There is a growing consensus that says, yes, rates are important, but it is not just about rates. In a report commissioned by the Mayor of London—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
492 c693-4 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Alcoholic drinks Companies Business Corporation tax Competition Capital investment Excise duties Business rates Public houses Tax allowances Tax avoidance Taxation VAT Tax rates and bands Trade competitiveness
Legislation
Finance Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk