Proceeding contribution from Nigel Mills (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 4 July 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance (No. 3) Bill.
Finance (No. 3) Bill
I wish to clarify something. My aim in new clause 12 was not to do what the right hon. Gentleman fears will happen, but to do the opposite. I was aiming to ask the OTS to consider simplifying or replacing the capital allowances regime with one that would match the tax relief more closely to the life of the assets being invested in. My concern was that an 18% reducing balance was giving tax relief over a far longer period than the actual useful life of those assets. I felt that having a simpler system, where a shorter ““life”” meant that the tax relief would be obtained much faster, would incentivise investment, not discourage it.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 530 c1317
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disadvantaged Directors Assets Corporation tax Banks Credit Advisory services Capital allowances Income tax Financial services Interest rates Low incomes Pay Nuclear power Loans Money lenders Social Fund Regulation Taxation VAT Tax rates and bands Tax yields
- Legislation
- Finance (No. 3) Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 17:24:51 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756099
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756099
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756099