Lucy Rigby MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

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

  More

  Clauses 272 and 273 will make changes to ensure that HMRC receives information under the cryptoasset reporting framework from UK cryptoasset businesses about their UK-resident customers. This will streamline reporting for businesses, which will be able to use the same HMRC reporting portal for both their UK and non-UK resident customers. The changes made by clause 272 will require UK cryptoasset businesses to report data about their UK customers to HMRC in a consistent manner. That will streamline reporting and ensure that HMRC will have standardised data on all UK taxpayers in countries, including the UK, that have implemented the cryptoasset reporting framework. That data will consist of details of the taxpayer and aggregated data concerning their transactions involving cryptoassets. Clause 273 is a maintenance provision for clause 272 that allows the Treasury to lay further secondary legislation, if required, to maintain the domestic reporting legislation under the reporting framework. The clauses legislate to provide HMRC with reporting framework information on UK-resident customers reported by UK cryptoasset businesses, which will streamline reporting. I therefore commend the clauses to the Committee.

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

  More

  The shadow City Minister gives voice to a legitimate concern, and I was about to come on to some of the ways we are tackling it. As I said before lunch, the Exchequer Secretary has asked HMRC officials to work with stakeholders in developing the fine detail everyone wants to see in the guidance on how this prohibition will work in practice. The power in clause 156 will allow HMRC to make regulations only where arrangements have been or are likely to be marketed, where they are unlikely to work and where they are likely to cause harm to taxpayers. That limits HMRC’s scope to proscribe arrangements. The power is not at all intended so that HMRC can ban advisers from recommending tax positions they think are right, based on all the facts of the law, but with which HMRC disagrees. On the consultation with industry, we have consulted extensively on these measures. What was originally described as the universal stop notice was introduced as part of a 12-week consultation by HMRC in March 2025. A further eight-week consultation was held on the draft legislation after it was published on L day. The initial consultation received 37 written responses from a range of stakeholders—primarily those in the tax and legal sectors—while a further 19 responses were received in response to the L day consultations. Importantly, three key changes were made in response to those stakeholder concerns, including the rule of law concerns given voice to by the Law Society regarding universal stop notices and giving HMRC legislative power that ultimately carries a criminal offence. That has evolved into the prohibition and the regulations that now require the approval of Parliament. In the light of stakeholder concerns around the threshold to issue regulations, HMRC introduced the taxpayer harms test to limit what arrangements are caught by the measure, ensuring that legitimate advisers are not in scope of the measure. The marketing test was originally drafted as “could be marketed”, but following consultation it was amended to “likely to be”, precisely to narrow the power.

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

  More

  I welcome the support from the official Opposition and the Liberal Democrats for these measures. As I said—I will repeat it because we have all had lunch since—these clauses are about targeting those who continue to promote tax avoidance; they are very much not intended to be directed against legitimate tax advisers who operate to a high professional standard but who may, acting in good faith, make a genuine mistake.

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

  More

  Clause 126 introduces two new criminal offences, to which we have already alluded, for possessing or transferring duty stamps in contravention of the scheme rules. Clause 127 introduces the two new criminal offences that I have just described, and sets out a defence for the purposes of those offences. Clause 128 introduces the power for a court to ban the sales of vaping products, along with an associated criminal offence for non-compliance with the order. Clause 129 sets the level of the penalty associated with the offences, according to the respective legal systems of the devolved nations. Clause 130 introduces additional powers to allow HMRC to enforce the new rules around vaping products by taking illicit products off shelves. In summary, the clauses represent a comprehensive suite of enforcement tools that support the Government to address the illegal trade and support the legitimate industry. I therefore urge that clauses 126 to 130 stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  I am grateful for the hon. Member’s intervention, which I will come to in a second. On the shadow Exchequer Secretary’s central point about the definition of vaping and the inclusion of nicotine-free liquids, the definition is deliberately broad to reflect how the market operates and to support what we hope will be effective enforcement. Most liquids used in vapes contain nicotine and either glycerine or glycol. The clause therefore focuses on those ingredients and on whether the liquid is intended to be vaped. Bringing into scope liquids that need to be mixed before use closes a potential loophole in a manner that I am sure we all want, because products could otherwise be sold in separate components to avoid their duty. Nicotine-free liquids are included because it would be easy to misdescribe or mislabel liquids and, in doing so, evade the duty. The approach that we are taking will give Border Force and HMRC clear rules to work with, enabling quick decisions at the border. That is in line with how other excise regimes define products to minimise avoidance. As to the cost of implementation, the cost of the duty stamps contract was considered in the shadow Exchequer Secretary’s beloved TIINs, but the industry will pay for it through the stamps. Finally, the hon. Member for Newton Abbot raised a fair point about recycling. We are considering the impact of recycling and existing Government contracts, so this will be considered in the round. Question put and agreed to. Clause 112 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 113 to 116 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 117 Stamping of vaping products Question put, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  The shadow Exchequer Secretary raised a point about the strong penalties associated with the regime. I have already set out the Government’s aim: that the enforcement mechanisms in the Bill are deliberately tough and are aimed at being a strong deterrent. We believe that the strong penalties, including custodial sentences, are justified due to the size of the illicit vaping market in the UK. Indeed, that goes to the shadow Exchequer Secretary’s point about our assessment of the illicit market and the assessment of abuse. We understand that there is a large illicit market in this area. The powers are deliberately tough, with the aim of ensuring that there is no circumvention. I will now address the fair points that were made previously by the hon. Member for Newton Abbot and raised again in the context of these clauses. All prosecutions, as hon. Members will know, must meet the public interest test. The test that the Crown Prosecution Service must meet has two limbs: the evidential and public interest elements. Both limbs must be met for prosecutions to be brought. The hon. Member for Newton Abbot referred, fairly, to clause 126(3) and 127(3), which outline the defence that is applicable to both offences. As he helpfully mentioned, it is a defence for a person charged with offences under sections 126 and 127 to “prove that they did not know, suspect or have reason to suspect” that they were possessing or transferring a duty stamp that had not been affixed to a vaping product. In that regard, on the question about proof of knowledge, I return to the CPS’s test and to the burden of proof that applies in proceedings in the UK. Question put and agreed to. Clause 126 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 127 to 130 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 131 Publication of information Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  The shadow Exchequer Secretary’s points about the criminal offences are similar to some of the points that were raised earlier in relation to other criminal offences set out in the Bill. I made the point in relation to those other offences, and I make it again here, about the standards that the CPS, or indeed any other prosecutorial authority, has to meet in satisfying both the evidential test and the public interest test. I am not sure that I need to take up the invitation to liaise with the Law Officers in that regard. Questions were fairly raised about proportionality and the burden on businesses. The UK CBAM will operate like a conventional tax, in order to simplify the administrative and compliance burden for those who need to comply without, we think, undermining the environmental integrity of CBAM. However, the Government recognise that alignment with existing regimes—the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Maidenhead, referred to the EU CBAM and, indeed, to the ETS—can reduce administrative burdens, so where possible we will align with and build upon existing methodologies for calculating embodied emissions, as well as rules for monitoring reporting and verification under the ETS. As hon. Members know, CBAM is not expected to have significant macroeconomic impacts or a significant impact on prices for individuals, households and families. CBAM imports make up only around 1% of average UK industry input costs. Therefore, as the Exchequer Secretary said, the Government do not expect CBAM to have a material impact on food prices, and the impact on farmers would be modest. On the Liberal Democrat spokesperson’s point about thresholds, the threshold will retain over 99% of CBAM imports while removing 80% of otherwise registrable businesses, and over 70% of those removed from CBAM altogether by the threshold will be micro, small and medium-sized businesses. Question put and agreed to. Clause 148 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 16 agreed to. Clause 149 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 17 agreed to. Clause 150 Supplementary amendments Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  I appreciate your accommodation of the cold in the room, Sir Roger. I hope this afternoon proves that we can be both sartorially elegant and warm. Committee members may take their own view, but I look forward to this afternoon. Clauses 148 and 149 and schedules 16 and 17 provide the administrative and enforcement framework necessary to ensure the effective operation of CBAM. They ensure that CBAM can be administered properly by HMRC, complied with by businesses, and enforced where necessary. The clause introduces schedule 16, which makes detailed provision for the administration and enforcement of CBAM, including requirements for registration, accounting periods, CBAM returns, record keeping, payment deadlines, assessments, penalties and appeals. The schedule aligns CBAM administration with established HMRC processes where possible, helping to minimise additional burdens on businesses while ensuring robust compliance. Clause 149 introduces schedule 17, which provides for criminal offences relating to CBAM. Those offences apply in serious cases, such as deliberate evasion or fraudulent behaviour, and mirror existing approaches taken elsewhere in the tax system. The inclusion of criminal offences ensures that appropriate deterrents are in place, protecting the integrity of the regime and ensuring a level playing field for compliant businesses. Together, clauses 148 and 149 provide the necessary administrative and enforcement backbone for CBAM. They ensure that the regime is credible, enforceable and fair, while giving HMRC the tools it needs to administer CBAM effectively. I commend the clauses and schedules 16 and 17 to the Committee.

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

  More

  Clauses 150 to 155 and schedule 18 make the general, supplementary and commencement provisions for CBAM. They are designed to ensure that CBAM integrates properly with the wider statute book, operates coherently over time and comes into force as intended from 1 January 2027. More specifically, clause 150 introduces schedule 18, which makes supplementary amendments to other legislation to ensure that CBAM operates consistently alongside existing customs and tax law. Clauses 151 and 152 provide key definitions and interpretation provisions, including the meaning of “emissions”, “carbon dioxide equivalent”, “importer” and “CBAM good”. These clauses are designed to ensure clarity and legal certainty across the regime. Clause 153 provides a power to make provision in relation to linked emissions trading schemes. This allows imported goods originating in countries with linked emissions trading scheme arrangements to be excluded from CBAM, reflecting international co-operation and avoiding unnecessary duplication. Clause 154 sets out how regulations and notices under CBAM are to be made, including the applicable parliamentary procedures, to ensure appropriate scrutiny, with affirmative or made affirmative procedures applying where regulations have a significant impact. Clause 155 provides for commencement and transitional arrangements. CBAM will apply to goods imported on or after 1 January 2027, with powers to smooth the transition during the initial years of operation. In summary, clauses 150 to 155 and schedule 18 provide the essential supporting framework that allows for the effective functioning of CBAM, and I commend them to the Committee.

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

  More

  Clauses 131 to 138 and Schedule 14 set out general provisions to ensure the effective implementation of the duty and the scheme. Clause 131 allows for the publication of information to ensure effective enforcement of the duty and the scheme. Clause 132 details the instances in which information may be shared between the commissioners and any persons with functions relating to the duty. It will allow information to be transferred in both directions, ensuring successful implementation and the proper joining up of compliance efforts. For any unauthorised disclosure, the clause includes an offence under section 19 of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005. The changes made by clause 133 provide a definition for local enforcement authorities and allow them to investigate whether businesses in their local areas are compliant with the duty. Clause 134 ensures that HMRC can make regulations and publish notices to make further provisions in relation to both the duty and the scheme. Clause 135 provides that regulations must be made by statutory instrument and sets out circumstances in which the made-affirmative procedure must be followed, including any provision that extends the cases in which vaping products are required to be stamped. Clause 136 allows for schedule 14 to the Finance Act 2020 to make changes to the Finance Acts of 1994, 2007, 2008, 2017 and 2021. Clause 137 does not make changes to legislation but merely ensures that the Bill is interpreted correctly. Clause 138 provides that the duty and the scheme will commence on 1 October 2026, and that vaping products manufactured or imported before that date will be liable if a duty stamp is affixed to that product. Two technical amendments are proposed to clause 138. Amendment 13 clarifies the drafting to ensure elements of the regulations can come into force at the proper time. Amendment 14 puts beyond doubt that the criminal offences under these schemes can apply to vaping products, regardless of the date that they were produced or imported. The amendments ensure that the duty can be successfully administered, and neither one reflects any change in Government policy.

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

  More

  Anyone selling illicit vapes puts the public at risk and undermines legitimate businesses. One million illegal vapes were seized by trading standards in the last full year for which statistics are available, so we know that this is a significant enforcement challenge. Clause 121 introduces enforcement powers to protect the integrity of the vaping duty stamps scheme. The changes made by clause 122 support robust compliance efforts under the vaping products duty and the stamps scheme, ensuring that only legitimate vaping products are supplied in the UK and penalising those who do not comply with the law. The changes made by clause 123 penalise those who lose stamps or attempt to use invalid stamps on illegitimate products to circumvent the rules. Clause 124 ensures that those who do not comply with the relevant regulations for the duty and stamps scheme are liable to penalties. Finally, clause 125 provides for the forfeiture of legitimate vaping products to complement the penalties imposed under the previous clauses. I commend the clauses to the Committee.

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

  More

  As I stated in our debate on the previous group, the vaping products duty is a new excise duty on vaping products manufactured or imported into the UK from 1 October 2026. Clause 117 is important in setting out what a duty stamp is for the purposes of the vaping products duty and the conditions under which a vaping product is considered sufficiently stamped and compliant with the vaping duty stamps scheme. The changes made by clause 118 will allow HMRC commissioners to appoint an approved supplier to produce and distribute vaping duty stamps. In addition, the clause allows a fee to be charged for the duty stamp, separately from the liability of vaping products duty, and explains that that charge may not be offset against duty liability. The changes introduced by clause 119 will establish a formal approval requirement for UK businesses to purchase duty stamps under the vaping duty stamps scheme, which will allow HMRC commissioners to maintain control over the scheme and ensure compliance. Clause 120 will ensure that overseas vaping manufacturers have a representative in the UK who is legally and financially responsible for their compliance with the vaping duty stamps scheme, to ensure robust oversight. We are safeguarding compliance by requiring overseas manufacturers to operate within the framework of UK law, strengthening control and accountability across the supply chain. There will be impacts on all overseas importers and manufacturers of vaping products, who will be required to appoint a UK representative in the manner that I have described. Together, the clauses will ensure that the vaping products duty is robustly enforced through a secure duty stamps regime and that all manufacturers, whether they are based in the UK or overseas, are subject to clear accountability. I commend clauses 117 to 120 to the Committee.

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

  More

  The shadow Exchequer Secretary referred to some of the points agreed at the EU-UK summit last May. As he knows, the EU and the UK agreed to work towards linking our respective ETSs. He will not expect me to comment on ongoing negotiations, so I will not do that, but I will say that we are committed to working closely with all interested stakeholders, including international partners, through the CBAM policy design process and, of course, we consulted extensively on the design and implementation of this measure. We have conducted information sessions at the World Trade Organisation and had extensive bilateral engagement with over 30 jurisdictions since announcing our intention to introduce a CBAM in December 2023. The UK will also engage through the UK CBAM international group, which serves as a forum through which the UK Government can understand the views of international partners and share updates. The shadow Exchequer Secretary will forgive me for reiterating what I know he already knows, which is that all tax policy is kept under review. He rightly refers to our desire to smooth the transition—that is absolutely key. We will ensure that there is sufficient time built in to facilitate that smooth transition, and time to test systems as well. Question put and agreed to. Clause 150 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 18 agreed to. Clauses 151 to 155 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 156 Prohibition of promotion of certain tax avoidance arrangements Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  Beautiful Norfolk—I know it very well. He compared Norfolk with more metropolitan areas. Local enforcement authorities, particularly trading standards, play a central role in tackling illicit vapes on the high street, and as has been mentioned, over 1 million illegal vapes have been seized in a single year under existing powers. Clause 133 gives local authorities the powers they need to conduct inspections and checks relating to both the duty and the scheme, to ensure that compliance work can be carried out effectively at retail level. That will complement the work of HMRC, which happens upstream. We have already announced additional funding for trading standards in the context of wider tobacco and vaping measures, alongside £10 million for Border Force and the recruitment of over 300 HMRC compliance officers focused on this area. Giving these powers to local authorities, backed by additional resource, will help to ensure that the new regime is enforced on the ground and that compliant retailers are protected from what would otherwise be unfair competition. Question put and agreed to. Clause 131 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 132 to 136 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 14 agreed to. Clause 137 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 138 Commencement and transitional provision Amendments made: 13, in clause 138, page 146, line 24, at end insert— “( ) Sections 114(4) (production only in accordance with regulations) and 117(1) (duty to stamp in accordance with regulations) come into force on such day as the Treasury may by regulations appoint.” This amendment would allow the requirements to produce and stamp vaping products in accordance with regulations to be brought into force at the same time as the regulations. Amendment 14: in clause 138, page 146, line 27, after “2027” insert “, and have effect in relation to vaping products irrespective of when they were produced or imported”— (Lucy Rigby.) This amendment would clarify (in light of the fact that stamping requirements are to be set out in regulations) that the criminal offences can apply to vaping products produced or imported before the Act is passed or the regulations are made. Clause 138 , as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 139 Introduction to CBAM

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

  More

  It is good to hear that the shadow Exchequer Secretary will not oppose the clauses. He is right about the policy impetus behind what we are doing. For the first time in the UK, more people vape than smoke. The chief medical officer has been clear that vaping is not risk-free, and those who do not smoke should not vape.

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

  More

  It is good to be back, Sir Roger. The vaping products duty is a new excise duty on vaping products manufactured or imported into the UK from 1 October 2026. The changes made by clause 112 will create a new charge to excise duty and set out the rate, which is £2.20 per 10 ml, rounded down to the nearest penny. The changes made by clauses 113 and 114 will define a vaping product and what constitutes production for the purposes of the vaping products duty. The changes made by clause 115 make clear the powers under which regulations on the vaping products duty will be made, in anticipation of its entry into force on 1 October 2026. Finally, the changes made by clause 116 will allow HM Revenue and Customs to manage and collect the vaping products duty and provide administrative powers around the storage of vaping products before duty has been paid, as well as penalties. Together, clauses 112 to 116 will establish a coherent and enforceable framework for the vaping products duty and will ensure that vaping products are taxed appropriately. I commend them to the Committee.

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

  More

  The comments of the shadow Exchequer Secretary, the hon. Member for North West Norfolk, refer to the deliberately tough nature of the enforcement regime; there is a real emphasis on deterrence, and there are penalties that apply. It includes the forfeiture powers, which are targeted at serious non-compliance. Where retailers are found selling unstamped products outside duty suspense or breaching key obligations under the scheme, HMRC and Border Force will have the power to seize associated vaping products, including legitimate duty-paid stock. As I said, that is part of a deliberately tough enforcement regime and is a strong deterrent aimed at those who choose to mix illegal products with legitimate ones on the same premises. I am sure we all understand that without such powers, rogue traders can treat penalties as simply a cost of doing business while continuing to profit from illicit trade, and I am sure we all want to avoid that. The shadow Exchequer Secretary made a number of points about ensuring that the use of powers is proportionate. Given the judicial or criminal processes associated with the use of these powers, it is entirely fair to say that all the usual processes around charging, in a criminal sense or otherwise, will apply. Inherent within those processes are balance and fairness, including taking into account the rights of the accused. It is good to mention the draft guidance, which will be shared with HMRC-run industry groups well ahead of the go-live date on 1 April, which I hope is sufficiently specific for the shadow Exchequer Secretary. He will be pleased to know—he may already know—that the interim guidance is already on gov.uk, if he is stuck for things to do this evening. I think I am right in saying that the points raised by the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Maidenhead, as to liability under these offences will be made explicitly clear in the guidance, such that there is no doubt in those circumstances. Question put and agreed to . Clause 121 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill . Clauses 122 to 125 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 126 Dealing in duty stamps Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  Clauses 156 to 162 introduce a new statutory prohibition on the promotion of tax avoidance arrangements. If you will forgive me, Sir Roger, I will set out a little more background on these clauses than I have on others, which I think is important. HMRC already can and regularly does stop people promoting marketed avoidance schemes, where it can identify the person or company doing the promotion. However, the controlling minds behind avoidance schemes often simply close down the company they use to promote the scheme before promoting a very similar scheme from a new company with different directors—everyone will be familiar with that concept of phoenixing. HMRC needs to identify and issue a new stop notice to each new entity and, during that time, promoters continue to sell the scheme and cause harm to taxpayers and the UK tax system. This measure will prohibit certain tax avoidance schemes from being promoted without HMRC first having to notify promoters, and will put a stop to promoters playing a game of cat and mouse with HMRC. These clauses are about targeting those who continue to promote tax avoidance. They are not intended to be directed against legitimate tax advisers who are operating to a high professional standard but, while acting in good faith, make genuine mistakes. Furthermore, the Exchequer Secretary has asked HMRC officials to work with stakeholders in developing published guidance to address the fine detail of exactly how the prohibition will work in practice. I turn to the individual clauses. Clause 156 will prohibit the promotion of avoidance arrangements that have no realistic prospect of success, as well as enabling HMRC commissioners to prohibit further arrangements in regulations. Any arrangements specified must have been, or be likely to be, marketed to seek a particular tax advantage, unlikely to result in that tax advantage, and likely to cause harm to taxpayers. Clause 157 provides for the definition of “promotion” of arrangements. It includes important exemptions, such as where goods and services are provided on commercial terms without the knowledge that they are being used to promote tax avoidance, or where legally privileged advice or information is provided. Clause 158 requires regulations implementing this policy change to be subject to the made affirmative procedure. That will ensure that the regulations take effect immediately, protecting the Revenue and taxpayers, while also ensuring proper oversight by this House. For anyone breaching the prohibition or the regulations, civil penalties may apply under clause 159, or a criminal offence under clause 160. Under clause 161, where a responsible person has led an entity or partnership to commit a criminal offence through their consent, connivance or neglect, that criminal offence will also apply to them. Clause 162 contains relevant definitions and commencement provisions. In summary, this measure will allow HMRC to stop the promotion of tax avoidance and tackle the persistent group of promoters. It will ensure that taxpayers and the UK tax system are protected from the harm caused by these promoters.

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

  More

  I am grateful to the shadow Exchequer Secretary, the hon. Member for North West Norfolk, and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Maidenhead, for their comments. I think we are all aiming for the same thing: a robust and tight enforcement of all the measures. On the shadow Exchequer Secretary’s point about moving towards a purely digital system, the reality is that that would be harder for consumers and for trading standards officers to use on shop floors, and consultation responses highlighted that it could impose greater burdens on small retailers than a visible stamp. The scheme is designed to have a physical label with embedded digital features, and that two-factor design is central to the compliance strategy. A visible, secure stamp gives retailers, consumers and enforcement officers an immediate way to spot non-compliant products at a glance, without the need for specialist equipment. As I said, however, the digital element is very important; it is similar to a secure QR code, allowing stamps and products to be scanned and verified in real time. That two-factor design is central to the compliance strategy. On the question of fees, they have been set to cover the cost of operating the scheme. The Government conducted a competitive tender process for the broader scheme. The shadow Exchequer Secretary is absolutely right that HMRC has promised clear guidance in this area, and that will be published in due course. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson fairly raised a comparison with alcohol duty stamps. HMRC consulted the alcohol industry and enforcement authorities and determined that alcohol duty stamps now play a minimal role in tackling alcohol duty evasion and that more effective controls now exist. HMRC is introducing duty stamps alongside the vaping products duty because of the distinct and significant non-compliance risk associated with the vaping market; it is about the utilisation of modern technology and digitalisation to support the delivery of the vaping products duty. I hope I have explained to him that we have examined the alcohol duty comparison and do not see a direct read across. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson also raised an important point about money laundering and anti-money laundering, which the Government take extremely seriously—in fact, we are reforming the supervisory function and compliance on AML. Question put and agreed to. Clause 117 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 118 to 120 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 121 Forfeiture Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

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

  More

  The shadow Exchequer Secretary asked about HMRC making compliance-checking methods available. There will be an app for access based on scans of products. It will be available before 1 October, and no scanning will be required before that date. He, fairly, asked a question about the flow of information. That is covered by subsections (3) and (4) of clause 132, which ensure that information can be used only for the purposes for which it was disclosed. Indeed, any other purpose would require further permission from the commissioners. Subsection (4) sets out the penalties that would apply for contravening the preceding provisions. The shadow Exchequer Secretary also asked about the resources available to trading standards and local authorities. He mentioned Norfolk, is that right?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Minister will appreciate that it is a requirement of UK domestic legislation to put companies in the position that they would have been in had the recovery legislation not been introduced, and it is that principle on which the clause is based. Question put and agreed to. Clause 51 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 52 Legacies to charities to be within scope of tax Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Turning to the non-Government amendments, new clause 28 asks His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to assess the potential benefits of establishing a digital application process for taxpayers seeking to pay capital gains tax by instalments following disposals to employee ownership trusts. The facility to pay CGT in instalments is a long-standing feature of the tax code and is well understood by both taxpayers and HMRC. The process for applying to pay by instalments is clearly set out within HMRC guidance and applications are dealt with swiftly once they have been received by HMRC. My officials have met representatives from the employee ownership sector to provide bespoke guidance on how these instalment payment provisions apply to disposals to EOTs. That engagement continues. I therefore ask the hon. Member for Maidenhead to withdraw new clause 28. In any event, it should be rejected. New clause 29 asks the Chancellor to lay a report before the House within the next 12 months assessing the impact on small and medium-sized enterprises of the changes made under clause 35. The Government monitor the impact of all changes made to existing tax reliefs. However, publishing a report on the change introduced by clause 35 within the next 12 months would not be reasonable as the first full tax year of these changes is the tax year 2026-27, so HMRC will not have complete information to assess their impact. New clause 29 should therefore be rejected. In addition to rejecting new clauses 28 and 29, I commend clause 35 to the Committee.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clause 47 will simplify the UK’s transfer pricing rules, which protect our tax base by ensuring that transactions between UK companies and related parties are priced appropriately. The changes made by the clause include the general repeal of UK-to-UK transfer pricing where there is no risk of tax loss. This will provide a meaningful simplification for businesses. Alongside it, amendments have been made to the participation condition, intangibles, commissioners’ sanctions, interpretation in accordance with OECD principles, and financial transactions. Government amendment 20 will ensure the consistent use of terminology with respect to financial transactions throughout the legislation. The changes made by the clause will update UK law in line with international standards, will reduce compliance obligations and will address areas of potential legislative weakness. I commend clause 47, schedule 6 and Government amendment 20 to the Committee.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The ICTS will help HMRC to focus compliance resources, as has been discussed, on the most meaningful transfer pricing risks. We think that it will also lead to greater efficiencies by encouraging up-front compliance and reducing the length of transfer pricing inquiries. Those outcomes will benefit the compliance of taxpayers and HMRC. Clause 48 gives the commissioners of HMRC the power to issue regulations that will determine the detailed design of the ICTS, including the information to be provided, the format of the schedule and the commencement date of the filing obligation. A consultation was held in 2025, and we will carry out a technical consultation on the draft regulations in spring 2026. The obligation is expected to take effect for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027, which is designed to allow time for businesses to adapt to what they need to do. The shadow Minister suggested that the proposal will lead to an administrative burden; actually, it is intended to mitigate additional administrative burdens by requiring the reporting of readily available objective information. We will continue to be guided by these principles as we move into the detailed design phase, working—as one would expect—with affected businesses. Question put and agreed to. Clause 48 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 49 Permanent establishments Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clause 46 will introduce a new corporation tax assessing provision for unassessed transfer pricing profits. It will replace the diverted profits tax, a stand-alone tax that will be repealed in its entirety, providing a significant simplification. The changes made by the clause will make the rules clearer and more straightforward for businesses to implement, and will support access to treaty benefits, including relief from double taxation under the mutual agreement procedure. The removal of the diverted profits tax as a stand-alone tax is a very significant simplification, and bringing the rules into the corporation tax framework will clarify the interaction with transfer pricing and access to treaty benefits. I therefore commend clause 46 and schedule 5 to the Committee.