Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed question first answered answering member label attachment file name title
tabling member	label

Search

911062

	registered interest
	date	24/05/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Customs
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what analysis supports the view of the Chief Executive of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs that the proposed maximum facilitation customs arrangement after the UK leaves the EU could cost businesses between £17 billion and £20 billion per year.
	tabling member printed	Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court
	uin	HL8225
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/06/2018 answer text <p>Analysis to support the numbers used by the Chief Executive of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs was outlined in a letter to the Chair of the Treasury Select Committee sent on 4 June 2018<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>. The letter is also attached.</p><p> </p><p>[1] https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/treasury/Correspondence/2017-19/hmrc-customs-costs-040618.pdf</p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 07/06/2018 16:36:12 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates attachment 1 file name hmrc-customs-costs-040618.pdf title HMRC letter
	tabling member	4586 label Biography information for Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court

1064789

	registered interest
	date	21/02/2019
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Stamp Duty Land Tax
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have evaluated the impact on revenues of the stamp duty reforms announced in the 2014 Autumn Statement.
	tabling member printed	Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court
	uin	HL13953
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/03/2019 answer text <p>At Autumn Statement 2014 the government published costings of the reforms to Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) which highlighted the anticipated revenue implications of the reform across the forecast period. HMRC also publish quarterly and annual statistics on SDLT revenue and transactions.</p><p> </p><p>Residential SDLT receipts were just under £1.8bn higher in 2017-18 than they were in 2014-15, the last financial year before the Autumn Statement 2014 reforms.</p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 07/03/2019 14:55:56 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
	tabling member	4586 label Biography information for Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court

751187

	registered interest
	date	12/07/2017
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	CaTreasury
	hansard heading	Digital Technology: Sales
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 20 February (HL5112), whether they intend to update the table on housing sales and stamp duty land tax to include data for 2016–17.
	tabling member printed	Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court
	uin	HL784
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/07/2017 answer text <p>Statistics on residential property transactions and Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) receipts, based on financial year, are published annually in HMRC's 'Annual Stamp Tax Statistics' publication, on gov.uk. Statistics for 2016-17 are due to be published in September 2017.</p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 25/07/2017 10:04:18 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
	tabling member	4586 label Biography information for Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court

768554

	registered interest
	date	11/10/2017
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	CaTreasury
	hansard heading	Stamp Duty Land Tax
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in reforming stamp duty land tax, it was their policy intention to reduce receipts and transactions in properties over £1million in 2016–17.
	tabling member printed	Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court
	uin	HL1905
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/10/2017 answer text <p>Housing market activity is affected by a wide variety of factors, of which Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) is just one. The Autumn Statement 2014 reforms were introduced to reduce distortions and improve the fairness of the tax system. The reforms led to 98% of purchasers paying less, unless they are buying an additional property. The government believes it is fair that those who can afford to buy the most expensive properties contribute the most.</p><p> </p><p>Overall, total residential SDLT receipts increased between 2015-16 and 2016-17.</p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 23/10/2017 11:36:10 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
	tabling member	4586 label Biography information for Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court

827889

	registered interest
	date	22/01/2018
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	CaTreasury
	hansard heading	Public Expenditure
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 21 March 2017 (HL5881), whether they will publish an updated table including (1) pensions, (2) health, and (3) total managed expenditure, for 2016–17.
	tabling member printed	Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court
	uin	HL4939
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/02/2018 answer text <p>The requested information is in the table:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>1978-79</p></td><td><p>1996-97</p></td><td><p>2009-10</p></td><td><p>2015-16</p></td><td><p>2016-17</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(1) National insurance-funded pensions (£billion)<sup> (1)</sup></p></td><td><p>7.6</p></td><td><p>32.0</p></td><td><p>66.8</p></td><td><p>89.3</p></td><td><p>91.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>as a percentage of Total Managed Expenditure</p></td><td><p>9.5%</p></td><td><p>9.9%</p></td><td><p>9.6%</p></td><td><p>11.8%</p></td><td><p>11.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(2) UK Health Expenditure (£billion) <sup>(2)</sup></p></td><td><p>7.8</p></td><td><p>42.8</p></td><td><p>116.9</p></td><td><p>138.5</p></td><td><p>144.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>as a percentage of Total Managed Expenditure</p></td><td><p>9.8%</p></td><td><p>13.2%</p></td><td><p>16.9%</p></td><td><p>18.4%</p></td><td><p>18.7%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total Managed Expenditure (£billion)<sup> (3)</sup></p></td><td><p>79.7</p></td><td><p>323.9</p></td><td><p>693.1</p></td><td><p>753.9</p></td><td><p>770.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Data Sources:</p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><p>(1) Benefit expenditure and caseload tables published by the Department of Work and Pensions. Figures for National insurance-funded pensions have been provided in line with the request in the initial PQ referred to.</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><p>(2) Table 4.2 of Public Expenditure and Statistical Analyses 2017 published by HM Treasury,</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>and the equivalent table for 1978-79 data.</p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><p>(3) Data published by the Office for National Statistics consistent with the Public Expenditure</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Statistical Analyses 2017.</p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 05/02/2018 15:33:48 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
	tabling member	4586 label Biography information for Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court

868233

	registered interest
	date	20/03/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	National Insurance Contributions: Older People
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how much revenue they estimate would be raised if a national insurance charge of one per cent were applied to the employment, pension, savings, and rental income of those over retirement age, assuming the same national insurance allowance as for those below retirement age.
	tabling member printed	Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court
	uin	HL6505
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/03/2018 answer text <p>The revenue raised from increasing Class 1 national insurance rates on employment income by 1% may be approximated using the “Direct effects of illustrative tax changes”<sup>1</sup>.</p><p> </p><p>This shows the yield from a change in the Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percentage point and the Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point in 2018-19 through to 2020-21.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>(£m)</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2018-19</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2019-20</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2020-21</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Change Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percent point</strong></p></td><td><p>4050</p></td><td><p>4200</p></td><td><p>4300</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Change Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point</strong></p></td><td><p>890</p></td><td><p>910</p></td><td><p>940</p></td></tr></tbody></table><ol><li><strong>Extract of the table as published at the following address: </strong><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/direct-effects-of-illustrative-tax-changes" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/direct-effects-of-illustrative-tax-changes</a></li></ol><p><strong> </strong></p>An estimate of the impact of introducing a NICs charge for those over state pension age or a surcharge for those below state pension age on rental, savings, and pensions income is not available. National Insurance is not currently payable on these income streams and therefore a number of policy design decisions would need to be taken in order to estimate how much would be raised from introducing such a charge. answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 29/03/2018 16:01:14 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
	tabling member	4586 label Biography information for Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court

868234

	registered interest
	date	20/03/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	National Insurance Contributions
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how much revenue they estimate would be raised if a national insurance surcharge of one per cent were applied to the employment, rental, savings, and pensions income of those below retirement age.
	tabling member printed	Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court
	uin	HL6506
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/03/2018 answer text <p>The revenue raised from increasing Class 1 national insurance rates on employment income by 1% may be approximated using the “Direct effects of illustrative tax changes”<sup>1</sup>.</p><p> </p><p>This shows the yield from a change in the Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percentage point and the Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point in 2018-19 through to 2020-21.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>(£m)</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2018-19</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2019-20</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2020-21</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Change Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percent point</strong></p></td><td><p>4050</p></td><td><p>4200</p></td><td><p>4300</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Change Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point</strong></p></td><td><p>890</p></td><td><p>910</p></td><td><p>940</p></td></tr></tbody></table><ol><li><strong>Extract of the table as published at the following address: </strong><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/direct-effects-of-illustrative-tax-changes" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/direct-effects-of-illustrative-tax-changes</a></li></ol><p><strong> </strong></p>An estimate of the impact of introducing a NICs charge for those over state pension age or a surcharge for those below state pension age on rental, savings, and pensions income is not available. National Insurance is not currently payable on these income streams and therefore a number of policy design decisions would need to be taken in order to estimate how much would be raised from introducing such a charge. answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 29/03/2018 14:45:32 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
	tabling member	4586 label Biography information for Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court