Income Tax: Top Rate Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury

Income Tax: Top Rate

Lord Kinnock Excerpts
Monday 16th March 2015

(9 years, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Newby Portrait Lord Newby
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Yes, my Lords.

Lord Kinnock Portrait Lord Kinnock (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, does the Minister recognise, along with most analysts, that the figures that he has just given have probably been distorted by the practice of forestalling? Does he realise that such practice by some top rate taxpayers meant that they delayed their returns from 2012 to 2013 to take advantage of the 5% top rate tax cut in the following year, after it was announced in the 2012 Budget? Instead of drawing glib conclusions from the figures that he has given, would he and Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs not realise that each 1% increase on the top rate of income tax can generate an extra £1.1 billion? Therefore, a cut can lose £5 billion in any year following the first year after the tax cut. When we have—

None Portrait Noble Lords
- Hansard -

Oh!

Lord Kinnock Portrait Lord Kinnock
- Hansard - -

When we have a deficit of £90 billion, can the country really afford that when we are supposed to be all in it together?

Lord Newby Portrait Lord Newby
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I am afraid that the noble Lord’s figures are just completely wrong. The figures produced by HMRC, which I am sure he has read, showed that its central estimate of the effect of reducing the top rate from 50p to 45p was a cost of £100 million, against which should be set—among other changes that this Government have made that exclusively hit the very affluent—the changes in disguised remuneration, which brought in £3.5 billion this Parliament, and the reduction in pensions tax relief, which will bring in £5 billion a year.