Proceeding contribution from Lord Redwood (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 shadow Minister is not completing the thought. We are not disputing the gross amount. We are asking how much other revenue was lost because of the behavioural consequences. He has agreed that the purpose of the bank bonus tax was to drive down bonuses. Assuming that there was some success, the Exchequer must have lost a pile of money in other taxes.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 543 c389
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:56:30 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_823665
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_823665
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_823665