Dan Tomlinson MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The clause is a key one for going after promoters based offshore, to go to the points made in the debate so far. The Committee is right that it is tricky to go after those based overseas. That is why HMRC is taking this new approach with the promoter action notices, which sever the ability of promoters based overseas to have interactions and dealings with companies based in the UK. The Tax Policy Associates stated: “This is important; promoters have, for some time, been using offshore entities to make it harder for HMRC to take action against them. However any business targeting UK clients is inevitably going to rely on banks, social media etc in the UK—so it makes sense to enable HMRC to target.” That is part of what the clause is trying to do.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I have set this out, but I want to clarify that the tribunal is independent. The head of the tribunal would be an existing first-tier tax tribunal judge. As the hon. Member for Newton Abbot has particular experience and interest in this, I will write to him in more detail on the composition and independence of the tax tribunal on this important point. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest, asked whether the Government would consider removing paragraph 6(7), and I can confirm that the Government do not intend to make that change. Question put and agreed to. Clause 241 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 20 agreed to. Clause 242 Disclosure of information Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The registration will be phased in during 2026-27. Tax advisers will not have to register immediately on 18 May 2026; it will be from then. Question put and agreed to. Clause 242 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 243 to 246 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 247 Conduct of tax advisers Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clauses 206 to 212 make changes to ensure that HMRC can publish the details of legal professionals involved in designing tax avoidance schemes. A very small number of legal professionals have become involved in the promotion of tax avoidance schemes. They are sometimes involved in designing schemes, including by providing questionable legal advice to promoters of the scheme on the scheme’s efficacy. That legal advice can sometimes be used to help market the scheme to taxpayers, as it is held up as showing that the scheme works and is above board. In reality, however, these schemes rarely work and the scheme users end up footing an unexpected tax bill. Although existing legislation allows HMRC to publish the details of some legal professionals, HMRC cannot do so when the legal professional’s role is limited to activity subject to legal professional privilege. That prohibits HMRC from publishing the details of legal professionals who design schemes but do no more than that. These clauses amend the publishing legislation to allow HMRC to publish the details of legal professionals in those circumstances.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  One of the big challenges with these promoters is that, although HMRC often finds different routes to go after them, their non-compliance and the fact they are based overseas make effective enforcement difficult. I am aware of that, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman and other Opposition Members were aware of it when they were in government. It is frustrating and difficult to go after promoters. This measure seeks to find a new way to restrict their ability to engage with products and services based in the UK, because it is only through those that they will be able to reach people in the UK in the promotion of the schemes. The shadow City Minister, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest, asked about HMRC workload. This is a good point, and one that I will focus on with officials and happily discuss in advance of the Budget. One of the big decisions that this Government have made is to increase the number of enforcement and compliance officers in HMRC—by, I believe, 5,500. Broadly, we are making that possible by reducing the number of HMRC customer services staff, because we are asking customers more generally to go online. We are targeting 90% online or digital interaction, so that we can save money for the taxpayer by having better, more streamlined interactions online, and then use some of that resource to more effectively resource our compliance unit. The matter of workload is important for me to consider closely, as the Minister with responsibility for HMRC, and the hon. Member is right to raise it. We will keep working with international partners to explore how best to co-operate with other authorities to ensure that these proposals, existing powers and any further powers that the Government may consider in the future can effectively tackle promoters based overseas. Opposition Members also raised the issue of appeals. It is important to note that promoter action notices are issued only towards the end of the line. Promoters can be issued them only when HMRC has certified that they have breached a stop notice, which is a serious thing, or the prohibition of the promotion of certain tax avoidance arrangements. Breaching either of those amounts to a criminal offence, so it is a serious step to have reached. Promoters will have the right to provide representations to HMRC as part of that process. The hon. Member for Wyre Forest spoke about initial notices under clause 165. That is part of the process of making sure that we are engaging and collaborating with businesses so that we can agree the actions they may be required to take under a promotion action notice. He also raised the issue of what happens if businesses go further than HMRC’s request and end up severing all ties with promoters. HMRC will specify the actions that need to be taken, but businesses may want to go further, at their own discretion and within the law. It will be up to them to do so. HMRC will not prescribe what more actions businesses may wish to take; what they must do will be tightly defined in the notices themselves. Question put and agreed to. Clause 163 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 164 to 173 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 174 Connected persons Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  As is the case with other items in this part of the Bill, we consulted extensively on these notices, with a 12-week consultation earlier in the year and a further eight-week consultation on the draft legislation when it was published. We received lots of responses and we made sure to listen to and reflect on the feedback. On prosecution, as well as the standards and safeguards set out in the Bill, for a prosecution to be brought against anyone it also has to meet the evidential tests and the public interest tests, which are set out more broadly in line with the code for Crown prosecutors. I hope that provides reassurance that although this does not stand part of the usual ways in which we ensure proper safeguards in our legal system, any prosecutions would of course be subject to the evidential and public interest tests. Question put and agreed to. Clause 186 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 187 to 205 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 206 Declaration in relation to privileged material Question proposed , That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  All I can say to the hon. Member is that HMRC will suspend a tax adviser only after due process, including after offering opportunities to comply and a chance for the adviser to explain if there was a good reason why they were unable to do so. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest, raised the point around the impact on tax advisers, and whether it would make it more expensive or burdensome for them to have to register in this way. It is worth noting that HMRC will not be charging for registration, and many tax advisers will already have an agent services account. Those that do will be moved automatically on to the new system, and will not have to re-register. HMRC will use automatic checks to ensure that the process is as quick and easy as possible for applicants.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  These clauses introduce a power for HMRC to issue promoter action notices. As my hon. Friend the Economic Secretary outlined, these are another part of our toolkit in pursuing the promoters. The notices require businesses to stop providing goods or services where those services are used in the promotion of avoidance. Clause 163 allows HMRC to certify promoters of tax arrangements where they have breached a stop notice or a prohibition on promoting certain tax arrangements. Clause 164 outlines the conditions for issuing a promoter action notice. Clause 165 provides powers for preliminary notices to be issued by HMRC. Clause 166 allows HMRC to disclose information relating to the promoter identified in a promoter action notice. Clause 167 allows recipients to appeal a promoter action notice on the grounds that they are not providing goods or services to the promoter and that those goods and services are not being used to promote tax avoidance. Any recipient who does not comply with a promoter action notice may be subject to civil penalties under clause 168. The penalty is £1,000 per day. Where a penalty applies, under clause 169, HMRC may also publish information about the recipient that is viewable for 12 months. Under clause 170, information may be disclosed by HMRC to a regulator, a representative body or a trade body of the recipient where they have failed to comply. Clause 171 allows for the extension of time periods for complying with a promoter action notice. Clause 172 outlines what are not reasonable excuses for failing to comply, including insufficiency of funds, reliance on other persons and where legal advice is not full and accurate. Clause 173 contains relevant definitions of “arrangements”, “promotion” and “certified promoter”. The powers will enable HMRC to sever promoters’ access to UK services. In doing so, they will protect taxpayers and the tax system from the harm of tax avoidance. I commend the clauses to the Committee.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you. Burnley is a fantastic place to visit, and I hope to come before too long. These clauses create the charge to CBAM, define the goods and emissions in scope, identify who is liable, and set out how the tax rate is calculated and how the relief operates. Together they form the substantive charging provisions that will underpin the operation of CBAM from 1 January 2027. Clause 139 introduces CBAM as a new tax and signposts the structure of part 5 of the Bill. Clause 140 establishes the charge to CBAM, which applies to the emissions embodied in specified CBAM goods when they are imported into the UK. Schedule 15 defines the goods in scope, initially covering the aluminium, cement, fertiliser, hydrogen, iron and steel sectors. Clauses 141 to 143 set out when goods are treated as imported for CBAM purposes, and who is liable for the charge. In line with established customs principles, liability rests with the importer, with detailed provisions to ensure that the correct person is identified across different importation scenarios, including goods entering via Northern Ireland or subject to special customs procedures. Clause 144 provides relevant exemptions from the charge. Clause 145 defines “emissions embodied in a CBAM good” and provides powers for the Treasury to specify, in regulations, how those emissions are determined and evidenced. Clause 146 sets out how the CBAM rate is calculated, and clause 147 provides for carbon price relief, allowing the CBAM charge to be reduced where a relevant carbon price has been incurred overseas in relation to the same emissions. That avoids double taxation while maintaining the integrity of the mechanism. Amendment 15 will ensure that the CBAM rate functions as intended, and that CBAM goods face a carbon price comparable to what would apply if the goods were produced in the UK. The clauses are central to mitigating carbon leakage, and supporting the UK’s path to net zero.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We will engage, and have engaged, with the industries that are directly affected by this change, including the fertiliser industry, and those for whom there will be knock-on effects from higher import prices. With fertiliser in particular, it is worth noting that UK-based fertiliser manufacturers have received more free allowances in recent years than they needed to surrender to be able to cover their emissions. As such, they are not, in practice, paying a carbon price at the moment. The CBAM rate will therefore be set at a low level to reflect that. It is something that I have been looking at as Minster because of these issues, and we expect the initial impact of CBAM on the fertiliser sector to be very modest. None the less I take the point that the hon. Member raises, and the Government will continue to look at it. On the point around groupings and EORI numbers, that is not a phrase that I have come across before, but I am glad that I have heard it. I will make sure to remind myself of the torturous Brexit process and will, I am sure, understand the context there in more detail. We engaged with businesses in advance of making the proposal and feedback indicated that group treatment would confer relatively minimal benefits, so we chose not to implement it at this time. We will, of course, keep that under review though. CBAM is a significant change that has been welcomed by many of the industries in the UK and should go a long way to levelling the playing field for those firms that are producing in these five sectors.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Exchequer Secretary invited the Economic Secretary to his constituency. Last week, he invited me to come on Valentine’s day to enjoy the bumper cars. I know the Economic Secretary is glad for the invite, but I am particularly glad for the one I received. Turning to the matter at hand, clauses 139 to 147 and schedule 15 establish the core framework of the carbon border adjustment mechanism, otherwise known as the CBAM— [ Interruption. ]

• 3 Feb 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Minister for his questions and engagement. This is one of the largest parts of the Bill, and sets out a significant change to taxation and the treatment of imports in order, as he says, to support domestic businesses that may face higher prices than companies seeking to export to the UK that have cheaper prices and higher emissions. To go through some of the questions that were asked, the criteria that were looked at internally—over many years and starting under the previous Government; it has taken five years of work to determine which sectors will be in scope—were whether sectors were already in scope of the UK emissions trading scheme, because it is important that those are aligned; whether there was real risk of carbon leakage; and whether it was feasible to implement in 2027. That is why these five sectors were chosen, after significant engagement across Government and with stakeholders. The sectoral scope will be kept under review, and there are some sectors that the Government will continue to have conversations with in the coming weeks to understand their concerns and the benefits that there may be to widening the scope in future. We will keep it under review because, at the moment, the focus is on making sure that we can implement this significant change. It is a long piece of legislation and there are lots of good questions, but we want to get this in as drafted first. The shadow Minister made several points regarding the sectors that are already in and the extent to which, in his words, they might be made “worse off”. It is important to note that they will be better off than without a CBAM in terms of competition and fairness in imports. At the moment, there is no CBAM, so the imports that come to the UK in these five sectors are, in a sense, undercutting domestic production if we have higher costs. With the introduction of CBAM, that undercutting will be significantly reduced. The prices faced by importers will be brought into line with those faced by those companies in the UK. There is a valid point to make about the detail and specificity with which the carbon prices that are used within CBAM are set, and that is something that I certainly want to keep under review, but it is good and it is right that we make progress with CBAM as set out in the legislation.

• 2 Feb 2026 · Draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Prescription of Non-Domestic Rating Multipliers) (England) Regulations 2026 Draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Calculation of Non-Domestic Rating High-Value Multiplier) (England) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  The regulations prescribe the circumstances in which the new retail, hospitality and leisure and high value business rates multipliers will apply. It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Dr Murrison—[Hon. Members: “No!”] No? Oh, that is totally wrong; who have we got in the Chair? [Hon. Members: “Mr Mundell.”] Mr Mundell—that’s right. Forgive me for my sins; I know not what I do. Members will be glad to know that I do not plan on speaking for 15 minutes today, as I did in the Chamber the other day. The regulations give effect to the new business rates multipliers for qualifying retail, hospitality and leisure and high-value properties. This is the first step to creating a fairer business rates system that protects the high street, supports investment and is fit for the 21st century. At the Budget we announced a comprehensive set of reforms to business rates. We have created a new, fairer system with permanently lower multipliers for RHL properties with rateable values below £500,000. The scope of these new multipliers is broadly the same as that of the current RHL relief. These new multipliers will be 5p below their national equivalents, but when combined with the outcomes of the revaluation, the tax rate that RHL properties on the small business multiplier pay next year will fall by nearly 12p and the rate for RHL properties on the standards multiplier by 12.5p. It is important that we make support for the high street sustainable, so we are funding these new multipliers through higher rates on the top 1% of properties—those with rateable values of £500,000 and above. The higher multiplier will be only 2.8% above the national standard multiplier, meaning that properties in its scope will pay a reasonable tax rate too. These new rates will be worth almost £1 billion a year and will benefit more than 750,000 RHL properties. They will mean that from April, the most valuable properties, such as large distribution warehouses occupied by online giants, will pay a tax rate 33% higher than that for small high street properties. The new business rates multipliers being brought into force by these statutory instruments are the first step to creating a fairer business rates system that protects the high street, supports investment and is fit for the 21st century. I commend them to the Committee—and forgive me, Mr Mundell.

• 2 Feb 2026 · Draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Prescription of Non-Domestic Rating Multipliers) (England) Regulations 2026 Draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Calculation of Non-Domestic Rating High-Value Multiplier) (England) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Calculation of Non-Domestic Rating High-Value Multiplier) (England) Regulations 2026.

• 2 Feb 2026 · Draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Prescription of Non-Domestic Rating Multipliers) (England) Regulations 2026 Draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Calculation of Non-Domestic Rating High-Value Multiplier) (England) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  In response to the points raised by the shadow Minister, it is worth emphasising that the decision to introduce new tax rates to the system means that, for the first time, a typical high street business now has a lower multiplier—a lower tax rate—than the online giants and the larger properties. The tax rate on larger properties is 33% higher than the rate paid by a smaller property on the high street. That significant difference is the first step in the reforms that we have implemented to business rates. I will not make the point that the previous Government would have removed the reliefs overnight, but I will say that if they were planning on keeping them, I do not understand why that information was not in the documents that the OBR published in advance of the general election. If the shadow Minister will not concede that his Government would have got rid of the reliefs overnight, he seems to be suggesting that there was a multibillion-pound unfunded tax cut that they did not tell us about before the election. I am not sure which he would prefer. In advance of the Budget, we considered the inclusion of large retail stores within the high-value multiplier. It is really encouraging that Sainsbury’s, the Co-op, Iceland and other large retailers have welcomed our getting the balance right in the business rates system and setting the multiplier at a rate that has allowed some shops to reduce prices, or at least hold down price increases for consumers, because of the changes that we made and the proportionate way in which we went about making them. We are committed to going further to reform the business rates system. At the Budget, we published a call for evidence on how to remove further barriers to investment. Transforming business rates is a multi-year process. The Government remain firmly committed to collaborating with stakeholders and with businesses small and large to achieve further meaningful change in the business rates system. Question put and agreed to. Draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Calculation of Non-Domestic Rating High-Value Multiplier) (England) Regulations 2026 Resolved, That the Committee has considered the draft Local Government Finance Act 1988 (Calculation of Non-Domestic Rating High-Value Multiplier) (England) Regulations 2026.— (Dan Tomlinson.)

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My remarks on clause 81 will be very brief. The changes that the clause makes will add combined county authorities to the list of bodies eligible for refunds under section 33 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994. This will remove the need for individual Treasury orders each time a new combined county authority is established. I commend the clause to the Committee.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his comments. It is good to converse with a new Opposition spokesman and I look forward to more conversations and discussions with him—though I do not have favourites. I want to be really clear—and I am glad to have the chance to be so—that the UK will continue to champion the free and fair trade that has benefited us so much in our history as a small, independent trading nation. We will always look to work with international partners to protect the rules-based international trading system. With this measure, we are not lapsing into protectionism and we will always make sure to balance the need to use these powers when and if they may be required in individual circumstances, with a continued focus on the need to be open because that is the route to sustained and long-term prosperity for a country with an economic and geopolitical position such as ours. Question put and agreed to . Clause 106 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill . Clause 107 Dumping and subsidisation investigations

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clause 98 increases the standard rate of landfill tax in line with the retail prices index. It increases the lower rate by the same cash amount, and it will take effect from 1 April 2026. This tax was introduced 20 years ago, and it is charged on materials disposed of at a landfill site or an unauthorised waste site in England and Northern Ireland. The objective of the tax is to divert waste away from landfill and to support investment in more circular waste management options, such as recycling and recovery. The Government consulted earlier this year on proposals to reform the tax to drive more materials out of landfill, and to design out incentives for landfill tax fraud. The hon. Member for Grantham and Bourne (Gareth Davies) is not here, but I enjoyed his video on this, in which he appeared with a hard hat. He, and others, have engaged on this issue. I particularly welcome the engagement from industry, which has welcomed the Government’s decision. The National Federation of Builders said we had “really engaged with industry”, and that the decision put forward after the Budget, following the consultation, would “allow the industry to start preparing for the circular economy”. Meanwhile, the chief executive of Biffa said that our decision “not to converge the two rates…is a good outcome for the industry”. I am glad that we have a very good tax policy. We are making progress, consulting in good time, engaging with industry, and coming forward with a proposal to make sure the gap does not get any wider on landfill tax—we are increasing the lower rate by the same cash amount as the increase in the higher rate—without adding significant burdens on those who seek to construct and build this country’s future, which we must do after 14 long years of under-investment and decline. New clause 22 would require the Government to make an assessment of the impacts of clause 98. At the Budget, the Government published a tax information and impact note for this measure, and our approach has been informed by extensive engagement with business. The Government oppose new clause 22 on that basis, and I urge the Committee to reject it. I commend clause 98 to the Committee.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The Government are, of course, aware of the pressures on local council finances as a result of the growing number of children with additional needs who require transportation or other support. It is important to note that the clause does not seek to apply additional VAT to those who are not already seeking to make use of the TOMS. The vast majority of taxi services across the country are not using the TOMS and will be unaffected by this change, but we think it right to ensure that this particular use of the TOMS cannot continue, in order that we can raise revenue.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will keep my remarks brief, if only to give the hon. Member for North West Norfolk more time to inform us of his opinions on this matter. Clause 89 makes changes to uprate vehicle excise duty rates for cars, vans and motorcycles in line with the retail prices index measure of inflation from 1 April 2026. New clause 17 would require the Chancellor to make a statement to the House on the impact of that 2026-27 increase to VED rates, but the increase announced in the Budget is in line with the retail prices index, meaning that rates will remain unchanged for vehicle owners in real terms by that metric. It is therefore the Government’s judgment that the new clause is unnecessary. I therefore commend clause 89 to the Committee, and recommend that new clause 17 be rejected.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clauses 87 and 88 implement changes announced at Budget 2025 concerning tobacco duty rates. At the Budget, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor confirmed that the Government will increase tobacco duty in line with the escalator. Clause 87 therefore specifies that the duty charged on all tobacco products will rise by 2 percentage points above retail prices index inflation. The new tobacco duty rates will be treated as having taken effect from 6 pm on the day they were announced, which was 26 November 2025. In October 2026, tobacco duty will rise again in line with the escalator with the introduction of vaping duty. That is to preserve the price differential between vaping and tobacco products to ensure the duty on vaping does not make smoking more attractive, and will maintain the incentive to choose vaping over smoking. New clause 31 would require the Government to publish an assessment of the impact of the changes to tobacco duty rates on the illicit tobacco market within six months of the Bill being passed. The Government will not accept the new clause, as the potential impact on the illicit market is already one of several factors that we consider when we take decisions on tobacco duty rates. We have already published a tax information and impact note alongside the Budget to set out the expected impact of this measure. I commend clauses 87 and 88 to the Committee and I reject new clause 31.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Of course, Mrs Harris. On the point that the hon. Member for North West Norfolk raised, it would be an unnecessary administrative burden to ask airlines to reformulate how they print and design their boarding passes as a result of an Opposition new clause, so I do not support it. Question put and agreed to. Clause 96 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 97 Rates of climate change levy Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Yes; in anticipation of the Budget and the announcements made at the Budget, work was carried out between HMRC and policy officials in the Treasury to assess the implications of tax changes on businesses and on the Government, and this is set out in the usual way. Question put and agreed to. Clause 111 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Ordered , That further consideration be now adjourned. — (Mark Ferguson.)

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The Government are committed to ensuring that world-leading capital markets support our firms to raise the capital they need to continue to grow and invest. Clause 82 introduces UK listing relief, which means that transfers of a company’s securities will be subject to relief from stamp duty reserve tax for the first three years after the company lists in the UK. Stamp duty reserve tax and stamp duty are charges on transfers of UK securities. They are vital sources of revenue for the Exchequer, and combined they are forecast to raise up to £5.3 billion a year by the end of the forecast period. The Government are focused on ensuring that the UK is the best place for firms to start, scale, list and stay, and we have delivered an ambitious programme of reforms to build on those strong foundations. The changes made by the clause will remove the 0.5% stamp duty reserve tax charge on the transfer of a company’s securities for three years from the point at which the company lists its shares on a UK-regulated market. That will enable newly listed companies to secure higher share prices, boost trading volumes and improve access to capital.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will not expound on the detail of the clauses, but I will explain why the Government cannot accept the amendments. On amendment 44, any public disclosure of evidence before an investigation is formally launched risks undermining it. The formal initiation of an investigation is a defined procedural step, and once an investigation has been formally initiated, the TRA may recommend the imposition of provisional duties. If there was a gap between publicly disclosing evidence and initiating an investigation, it might incentivise exporters to increase shipments of the goods concerned into the UK to avoid potential future duties. It would also risk contravening our international World Trade Organisation obligations. The rules are clear that authorities must avoid publicising the application for an investigation before a decision has been made to initiate it. To our knowledge, no such parliamentary veto exists in comparable trade remedy systems internationally, but I assure the House that the process will remain transparent and led by the evidence. On amendment 45, the Trade Remedies Authority is already required by our domestic legislation to publish the consumer and wider economic impact of proposed anti-dumping or countervailing duties. As part of its dumping and subsidisation investigations, the Trade Remedies Authority must advise the Secretary of State on whether and how any recommended anti-dumping or countervailing duties would meet the economic interest test as set out in legislation. The Secretary of State must then have regard to that advice when considering whether to accept or reject the recommendation. This advice is included in the TRA’s published reports across the case life cycle, including a statement of essential facts, which is included on the public file ahead of a recommendation to the Secretary of State. Since he has given me leave to do so, I will write to the shadow spokesperson, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest, on his specific question.