Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Jeremy Browne (Liberal Democrat) 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

That would have been funnier if the timing had been better. As it was, it was a typical Back-Bench attempt to be conservatively amusing. The Conservative party believes it is here to argue the case for British business. That is reasonable, but it is trying to create the impression that it wants to cut the tax burden on British business. In reality, though, it does not want to do anything of the sort, and that is why I said that the amendment could have been dealt with rather more quickly. Had the Opposition proposed from the Front Bench the measures articulated by the right hon. Member for Wokingham, that would have been worth debating all of today and tomorrow because it would have represented a massive change in economic and tax policy. However, that is not what the Conservatives are trying to do: they are trying to give that impression, but they are not really trying to achieve that. Even so, for the reasons that I am about to outline, I think the amendment is probably a step in the right direction. The first principle that I think ought to govern these matters is stability. Stability is beneficial: the Government have kept the rate unchanged, and that is a reasonable step in the right direction. It would help if they gave an indication of how long the rate will be kept at that level. I realise that future Finance Bills and general elections make it harder for them to give a firm commitment, but it would be helpful if business could have a feel for where corporation tax rates are going. The second principle is simplicity, and it is in that regard that I think the amendment is most worthy of support. Removing lots of rates and reliefs and concentrating on a lower headline rate makes the system easier to understand for companies. It is harder for people to dodge tax, and complying with tax obligations is less of an administrative burden. The third principle is transparency. I caution Conservative Members against creating the impression that they wish to cut business taxes when the reality is that they want nothing of the sort. They are in harmony with the Labour Government in thinking that the overall tax burden on business is exactly right, but this modest amendment at least advances the cause of simplicity and, on that basis, I see no reason to oppose it.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
492 c709-10 
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