Proceeding contribution from David Gauke (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 April 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance (No. 4) Bill (Clauses 1, 4, 8, 189 and 209, Schedules 1, 23 and 33, and certain new Clauses and new Schedules relating to value added tax).

(Clauses 1, 4, 8, 189 and 209, Schedules 1, 23 and 33, and certain new Clauses and new Schedules relating to value added tax)

The hon. Gentleman has referred to the academic debate. May I refer him to page 20 of the HMRC document, which relates to the IFS study? It states that Brewer, Saez and Shephard estimated a TIE of 0.46 in 2008, and Gruber and Saez estimated a TIE of between 0.5 and 0.7. It also states:"““The TIE estimate of 0.35 used in the Budget 2010… estimate””" —which the hon. Gentleman described as ““standard””—"““was deliberately at the low end of the academic elasticities surveyed.””" The 0.45 TIE is much more consistent with the academic position than the claims of the last Government.

Secondary information

Type: Proceeding contribution
Reference: 543 c338
Session: 2010-12
Chamber / Committee: House of Commons chamber
Subjects: Devolved matters Aviation Corporation tax Banks Caravans Air passenger duty Income tax Food Economic situation Personal income Northern Ireland Passengers Scotland Wales Tax avoidance Taxation Repairs and maintenance Tax rates and bands Religious buildings Take-away food Wealth Regional airports Bank levy
Legislation: Finance Bill 2010-12 to 2012-13
Link: View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk

(Clauses 1, 4, 8, 189 and 209, Schedules 1, 23 and 33, and certain new Clauses and new Schedules relating to value added tax)

Secondary information

Librarians' tools