Comparison of Divisions: Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — 28 Mar 2006 at 22:31 with Division No. 104 on 29 Apr 2009 at 15:49

Question accordingly agreed to.

48. Securitisation companies

Resolved,

That provision (including provision having retrospective effect) may be made about the taxation of securitisation companies.

49. Real Estate Investment Trusts

Resolved,

That provision may be made enabling companies which carry on property rental business to acquire a status that provides certain exemptions and liabilities (in relation to companies and shareholders).

50. Oil (market value)

Resolved,

That provision may be made in relation to the market value of oil (within the meaning of Part 1 of the Oil Taxation Act 1975).

51. Oil (nominated contracts and blended oil)

Resolved,

That provision may be made-

(a) for allocating blended oil to different fields for the purposes of section 2 of the Oil Taxation Act 1975, and

(b) amending section 61 of and Schedule 10 to the Finance Act 1987.

52. Ring fence trades (rate of supplementary charge)

Motion made, and Question put,

That-

(1) In section 501A of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, in subsection (1), for "10 per cent" there shall be substituted "20 per cent".

(2) The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall have effect in relation to any accounting period beginning on or after 1st January 2006 (but see also paragraph (3)).

(3) For the purpose of calculating the amount of the supplementary charge on a company for an accounting period (a "straddling period") beginning before 1st January 2006 and ending on or after that date-

(a) so much of the straddling period as falls before 1st January 2006, and so much of the straddling period as falls on or after that date, shall be treated as separate accounting periods, and

(b) the company's adjusted ring fence profits for the straddling period shall be apportioned to the two separate accounting periods in proportion to the number of days in those periods.

(4) The amount of the supplementary charge on the company for the straddling period shall be the sum of the amounts of supplementary charge that would, in accordance with paragraph (3), be chargeable on the company for those separate accounting periods.

(5) In the case of a company's straddling period-

(a) the Instalment Payments Regulations shall apply as if the amendment made by paragraph (1) had not been made, but

(b) those Regulations shall also apply separately, in accordance with the following paragraph, in relation to the increase in the amount of any supplementary charge on the company for that period that arises as a result of that amendment.

(6) In that separate application of those Regulations as mentioned in paragraph (5)(b), those Regulations shall have effect as if, for the purposes of those Regulations,-

(a) the straddling period were an accounting period beginning on 1st January 2006,

(b) supplementary charge were chargeable on the company for that period, and

(c) the amount of that charge were equal to the increase in the amount of the supplementary charge for the straddling period that arises as a result of the amendment made by paragraph (1).

(7) Any reference in the Instalment Payments Regulations to the total liability of a company shall, accordingly, be read-

(a) in their application as a result of paragraph (5)(a), as a reference to the amount that would be the company's total liability for the straddling period if the amendment made by paragraph (1) had not been made, and

(b) in their application as a result of paragraph (5)(b), as a reference to the amount of the supplementary charge on the company for the deemed accounting period under paragraph (6)(a).

(8) For the purposes of the Instalment Payments Regulations-

(a) a company shall be regarded as a large company as respects the deemed accounting period under paragraph (6)(a) if (and only if) it is a large company for those purposes as respects the straddling period, and

(b) any question whether a company is a large company as respects the straddling period shall be determined as it would have been determined if the amendment made by paragraph (1) had not been made.

(9) If the Instalment Payments Regulations-

(a) apply in relation to a company's liability to supplementary charge for the deemed accounting period under paragraph (6)(a), and

(b) would (but for this paragraph) treat any instalment payment in respect of that liability as being due and payable on a date falling on or before 22nd March 2006,

those Regulations shall have effect as if the payment were due and payable instead at the end of the period of 14 days beginning with that date.

(10) In this Resolution-

(a) "adjusted ring fence profits" has the meaning given by section 501A of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988,

(b) "the Instalment Payments Regulations" means the Corporation Tax (Instalment Payments) Regulations 1998,

(c) "supplementary charge" means any sum chargeable under section 501A(1) of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 as if it were an amount of corporation tax.

And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution should have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act 1968.

The House divided: Ayes 320, Noes 75.

The majority of MPs voted in favour of the motion:^[1]

• This House
• regrets the Government's recent statement^[2] outlining the eligibility criteria for Gurkhas to reside in the United Kingdom;
• recognises the contribution the Gurkhas have made to the safety and freedom of the United Kingdom for the past 200 years;
• notes that more Gurkhas have laid down their lives for the United Kingdom than are estimated to want to live here;
• believes that Gurkhas who retired before 1997 should be treated fairly and in the same way as those who have retired since;
• is concerned that the Government's new guidelines will permit only a small minority of Gurkhas and their families to settle whilst preventing the vast majority;
• further believes that people who are prepared to fight and die for the United Kingdom should be entitled to live in the country; and
• calls upon the Government to withdraw its new guidelines immediately and bring forward revised proposals that extend an equal right of residence to all Gurkhas.

As a consequence, the alternative Government motion, which read:^[3]

• This House
• recognises that this Government is the only one since the Second World War to allow Gurkhas and their families settlement rights to the United Kingdom;
• notes that in 2004 the Government permitted settlement rights to Gurkhas discharged since 1997, following the transfer of the Brigade HQ from Hong Kong to the United Kingdom;
• further notes that under these rules around 6,000 Gurkhas and family members have been welcomed to the UK;
• acknowledges that the court judgement of September 2008 determined that the 1997 cut-off date was fair and rational, while seeking clarification of the criteria for settlement rights for those who retired before 1997;
• further notes that on 24 April the Government published new and more generous guidelines for the settlement applications of Gurkhas who retired before 1997;
• supports this revised guidance, which will make around 10,000 Gurkhas and family members eligible to settle in the UK;
• further notes that the Government undertakes actively to inform those who may be eligible in Nepal of these changes and to review the impact of the new guidance within 12 months;
• further notes that the contribution Gurkhas have made is already recognised by pensions paid to around 25,000 Gurkhas or their widows in Nepal that allow for a good standard of living there; and
• further notes that in the year 2000 Gurkha pensions were doubled and that, earlier in April 2009, in addition to an inflationary uplift of 14 per cent., those over 80 years old received a 20 per cent. increase in their pension.

... was never voted upon.

Although this extremely rare Government defeat in an opposition day motion is not binding (has no legal force)^[4] a Government minister made a statement later in the day to bring "forward the date for the determination of the outstanding applications to the end of May."^[5]

• [1] Christopher Huhne MP, House of Commons, 29 April 2009
• [2] Phil Woollas MP, Written Ministerial Statement, 29 April 2009
• [3] Phil Woolas MP, House of Commons, 29 April 2009
• [4] Home Secretary Jacqui Smith blamed for humiliating Gurkhas defeat in the Commons, Daily Mail, 30 April 2009
• [5] Phil Woolas MP, House of Commons, 29 April 2009