Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Chris Huhne (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 24 June 2010. It occurred during Budget debate on Budget debate.


Capital Gains Tax (Rates)

The hon. Gentleman knows that the exemptions are exactly the same. I merely make a standard point that is made by the IFS every year when analysing the distributional consequences of any financial measures. We can always take individual measures—the hon. Gentleman refers to VAT, but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Ian Swales) has mentioned, the distributional consequences of what the Labour Government did with council tax were appalling because it is such an unfair tax—but we must look at the package as a whole. If one looks at the section of the document that describes what the distributional consequences are, one sees that the package as a whole is a fair one. An important part of the answer regarding where jobs will come from is, of course, from existing businesses as they recover as I have described. That will in turn feed confidence, consumer spending and investment. However, there is also a deeper answer.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
512 c449 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Bank services Climate change Capital investment Housing Environment protection Government assistance Economic situation Economic growth Forecasts National income Public expenditure Pollution control Public sector debt Standards Taxation VAT Institute for Fiscal Studies Office for Budget Responsibility Bank levy Sheffield Forgemasters Budget June 2010
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk