Question follow-through · 83964
Cryptoassets
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether she has considered introducing legislation to adopt a composite no gain, no loss framework to align the tax treatment of crypto-asset lending and staking with traditional financial instruments; and what prog
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Treasury
- Tabled
- 21 Oct 2025
- Target answer date
- 23 Oct 2025
- Answer
- 29 Oct 2025 · 8 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
21 Oct 2025
Question tabled
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether she has considered introducing legislation to adopt a composite no gain, no loss framework to align the tax treatment of crypto-asset lending and staking with traditional financial instruments; and what prog
23 Oct 2025
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
29 Oct 2025
Answer published
The government has engaged in detail with industry on the tax treatment for the lending and staking of cryptoassets, following the previous consultation on this issue. The government will be responding to the industry in due course.
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.