Finance Bill — Review of Remuneration of Investment Fund Managers — 28 Jun 2016 at 17:15
Zac Goldsmith MP, Richmond Park voted against requiring a review of the tax treatment of remuneration paid to investment fund managers.
The majority of MPs voted against requiring a review of the tax treatment of remuneration paid to investment fund managers.
MPs were considering the Finance Bill.
The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled Review of remuneration of investment fund managers and stated:
- The Chancellor of the Exchequer must commission a review of ways in which the law could be amended to ensure that no element of the remuneration paid to an investment fund manager may be treated as a capital gain, and that such remuneration shall be treated for tax purposes wholly as income, and must publish the report of the review within six months of the passing of this Act
The question rejected in this vote was:
- That the clause be read a Second time
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||304 (+2 tell)||0||0||92.7%|
|SNP||0||47 (+2 tell)||0||90.7%|