Poll: Should this bill be passed into law?
As many are of the opinion, Aye (22)
45.83%
On the contrary, No (23)
47.92%
Abstain (3)
6.25%
This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
V1005 – Trade and Competition Bill 2016, TSR Government
A
B I L L
TO
Increase the competitiveness of the UK by lowering Corporation Tax and scrapping Capital Gains Tax.

BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

1 Capital Gains Tax
The Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 is hereby repealed.

2 Corporation Tax
The rate of Corporation Tax is set at 15 pence to the pound.

3 Commencement, Extent and Short Title
(a) This Act comes into effect on 1 April 2017.
(b) This Act may be cited as the Trade and Competition Act 2016.
(c) This Act applies to the whole of the United Kingdom.


Notes
Spoiler:
Show
Encouraging trade and investment is a key part of encouraging growth in the economy. By scrapping Capital Gains Tax it means that there is one less barrier to trade, and by lowering Corporation Tax to 15% it means that we're able to compete to an ever greater extent with the rest of the world and that we're able to attract even more investors into the UK, creating jobs and improving livelihoods.

Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 for reference purposes


Costing
Spoiler:
Show
Changes to Capital Gains Tax: £5.5bn

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...stics_2015.pdf

Changes to Corporation Tax: £10.75bn

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...s_May_2016.pdf

Total cost of changes: £16.25bn
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
You were given very, very reasonable advice to make tiny changes to wording that could have been done in minutes. It was arrogant to ignore that advice.


No.
0
banterboy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
aye,. great bill
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by RayApparently)
You were given very, very reasonable advice to make tiny changes to wording that could have been done in minutes. It was arrogant to ignore that advice.


No.
Is this the change that you claimed was mandated by law without actually being able to tell us according to which law?

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
cBay
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
A budget should have come before this so we know where you intend to make up the loss. I can not trust this government to fill the gap in a sensible way so Nay.
1
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Is this the change that you claimed was mandated by law without actually being able to tell us according to which law?

Posted from TSR Mobile
I did in a post you never replied to.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
Nigel Farage MEP I'd have thought a jovial pedant such as yourself would have demanded the government followed proper procedure and punished them for this with a vote against?
0
username1524603
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by RayApparently)
Nigel Farage MEP I'd have thought a jovial pedant such as yourself would have demanded the government followed proper procedure and punished them for this with a vote against?
I remember the point, not including the change to Corporation Tax in a finance bill, or writing the bill to make it clear the change is for one year, creates work that should not be created, however, I do support what the bill's aim. Saracen's Fez please change my vote to an abstain in principle at the bad practice this bill encourages.
1
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
I remember the point, not including the change to Corporation Tax in a finance bill, or legislation to make it clear the change is for one year creates work that should not be created, however, I do support what the bill achieves. Saracen's Fez please change my vote to an abstain in principle at the bad practice this bill encourages.

That's a sensible choice.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
I remember the point, not including the change to Corporation Tax in a finance bill, or writing the bill to make it clear the change is for one year, creates work that should not be created, however, I do support what the bill's aim. Saracen's Fez please change my vote to an abstain in principle at the bad practice this bill encourages.
One Aye has been changed to an Abstention.
0
TheDefiniteArticle
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
Nay. I also find now, when it is too late to amend the Bill, to be the time to mention that this doesn't actually affect the law on CGT - as the Act repealed was a mere consolidating Act, its repeal sees a return to the law before the Act - read: exactly the same. Silly Government.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
PetrosAC The Financier TitanCream toronto353 Unown Uzer Imperion joecphillips tyroncs Kyx


I implore the honourable members to reconsider. Don't reward this government for it's weakest bill. Instead hold them to the standard you expect yourself to be held at and, assessing the arguments in post 8 and 11 of this thread, come to the unavoidable conclusion that this bill must not pass. If lower taxation for business is what your goal then you'll likely see that option in the upcoming budget/finance bill and B1011 will make that a less expensive policy to pursue. Don't pursue those reasonable goals by voting now for a poorly written, poorly thought out couple of lines of legislation.
0
Life_peer
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by RayApparently)
PetrosAC The Financier TitanCream toronto353 Unown Uzer Imperion joecphillips tyroncs Kyx


I implore the honourable members to reconsider. Don't reward this government for it's weakest bill. Instead hold them to the standard you expect yourself to be held at and, assessing the arguments in post 8 and 11 of this thread, come to the unavoidable conclusion that this bill must not pass. If lower taxation for business is what your goal then you'll likely see that option in the upcoming budget/finance bill and B1011 will make that a less expensive policy to pursue. Don't pursue those reasonable goals by voting now for a poorly written, poorly thought out couple of lines of legislation.
I'll have you know that the author of this bill is the same person you seemed fit to appoint as your Chancellor and who produced a budget under Fez.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Life_peer)
I'll have you know that the author of this bill is the same person you seemed fit to appoint as your Chancellor and who produced a budget under Fez.
I'm delighted by further proof that he did indeed lose his marbles.

Don't worry yourself, my imploring people to vote against the government couldn't possible be an example of opposition under JD's definition.
0
Life_peer
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by RayApparently)
I'm delighted by further proof that he did indeed lose his marbles.

Don't worry yourself, my imploring people to vote against the government couldn't possible be an example of opposition under JD's definition.
Oh, on the contrary! He's slowly recovering.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by Life_peer)
Oh, on the contrary! He's slowly recovering.
Perhaps this bill is a way of sabotaging you.
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
(Original post by RayApparently)
I'm delighted by further proof that he did indeed lose his marbles.

Don't worry yourself, my imploring people to vote against the government couldn't possible be an example of opposition under JD's definition.
You really have something wrong if you see raising council tax nearly 10 fold is sensible while cutting taxes for job creators is bad.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
You really have something wrong if you see raising council tax nearly 10 fold is sensible while cutting taxes for job creators is bad.

Posted from TSR Mobile
You've still chosen to ignore reasonable criticism to this bill. I may well have voted for a better version of it.
0
cBay
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
DanE1998 EricAteYou


Any chance I could convince either of you to change your Abstain to Nay? In particular considering the points raised by Ray and TDA that this bill won't actually do what the government intended, as well as my point that the government has failed to tell us how they will plug the funding gap (which will most likely be cuts affecting the weakest in society); this should have been done in conjunction with a budget.
0
cBay
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
also St. Brynjar anything I can do to convince you to vote nay? As with the above post.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (646)
33.51%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (817)
42.38%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (378)
19.61%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (87)
4.51%

Watched Threads

View All