Revoke the Corporation Tax (Instalment Payments) Regulations 1998 — rejected — 1 Mar 1999

The majority No voters rejected a proposal[1] to revoke the Corporation Tax (Instalment Payments) Regulations 1998.

The regulations require large companies to pay their corporation tax in instalments. This was a change to the previous system where large companies paid their corporation tax nine months after the end of their accounting period.

Nick Gibb MP argues for revoking the regulations as follows[2]:

  • '[This] is an enormous change and brings forward the tax bills of 20,000 of the largest companies in this country. Together, those companies employ more than half of all employees and represent half of the total turnover in 821 businesses in the United Kingdom. That is why the measure will raise £8.9 billion of extra taxes over the four-year transition period, money which has to be found and paid over by the corporate sector. That money could have been used for investment and job creation.'

However, Dawn Primarolo MP explains why the government is against revoking the regulations[3]:

  • 'companies which will not have to pay by instalments—the overwhelming majority of companies—will gain £1 billion in cash flow as a result of the abolition of advance corporation tax alone. After the transitional period is through, in the year 2003–04, companies will gain £1.6 billion a year from the combined effect of the changes... We have a simplified corporation tax system, which supports and encourages companies. We have an instalment method that will benefit companies, not cause problems for them.'


Historical Hansard | Online Hansard |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

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.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con0 113 (+2 tell)071.0%
Lab289 (+2 tell) 0069.8%
LDem0 17037.0%
Total:289 130067.7%

Rebel Voters - sorted by constituency

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive