Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McCabe (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 13 July 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HC) and Debate on bill on Finance Bill.


Finance Bill

I am conscious that the Government argument is that the VAT rise was an alternative to a national insurance rise, which they characterised as the tax on jobs. Does my hon. Friend share my disappointment that the Chancellor did not take advantage of the reduced rate of VAT that is allowed for labour-intensive industries under existing EU rules? The Government could have reduced the rate for places such as hairdressers and restaurants—low-paid labour-intensive industries—which would have helped these people through a difficult patch. In effect, the Government have done the opposite, and they are going to put these people out of business and cost us the jobs accordingly.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
513 c849 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Poverty Charities Exemptions Excise duties Fuels Economic situation Pensioners Low incomes Rural areas Taxation VAT Rescue services Tax burden Sunset clauses
Legislation
Finance Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk