Question follow-through · 12273
Armed Forces Compensation Scheme
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether he has made an assessment of the impact of treating Armed Forces Compensation Scheme payments as income for means-tested benefit assessments.
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Department for Work and Pensions
- Tabled
- 23 Jun 2026
- Target answer date
- 25 Jun 2026
- Answer
- 1 Jul 2026 · 8 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Opposition Day Motion: Defence spending and readiness - Prime Minister's Amendment · 23 Jun 2026
- Opposition day: Defence spending and readiness · 23 Jun 2026
- Armed Forces Bill Report Stage: Amendment 11 · 22 Jun 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
23 Jun 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether he has made an assessment of the impact of treating Armed Forces Compensation Scheme payments as income for means-tested benefit assessments.
25 Jun 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
1 Jul 2026
Answer published
Lump sum compensation from the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme is not treated as income, rather as capital which Universal Credit disregards for 12 months and may be disregarded indefinitely when it is held in a trust or used to purchase an annuity. The ...
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.