Question follow-through · 23593
Personal Care Services: VAT
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of a reduced rate of VAT on labour-intensive personal care services; and on its potential effect on employment, apprenticeships and tax revenues in the sector.
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
- 28 Aug 2026
- Target answer date
- 2 Sept 2026
- Answer
- 7 Sept 2026 · 10 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
28 Aug 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of a reduced rate of VAT on labour-intensive personal care services; and on its potential effect on employment, apprenticeships and tax revenues in the sector.
2 Sept 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
7 Sept 2026
Answer published
Supplies of welfare services, including the provision of care, are already exempt from VAT if they are supplied by eligible bodies, such as public bodies or charities. VAT is a broad-based tax on consumption, and the 20 per cent standard rate applies to m...
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.