Finance (No. 2) Bill 2016

Could Royal Assent be in October?

The Finance Bill passed its second reading on Monday 11 April 2016. At the same time, a programme motion and carry over motion were passed.

The following clauses and schedules will be debated in the Committee of the Whole House:

1.     Clauses 7 to 18 and Schedules 2 and 3 (employment income);

2.     Clauses 41 and 42 (corporation tax: charge and rates);

3.     Clauses 43 and 44 (corporation tax: research and development);

4.     Clauses 65 to 71 (capital allowances, trade and property business profits);

5.     Clauses 72 to 81 and Schedules 11 to 14 (capital gains tax);

6.     Clause 129 (insurance premium tax);

7.     Clauses 132 to 136 (climate change levy);

8.     Clauses 144 to 154 and Schedules 18 to 22 (tax avoidance and evasion);

9.     Any new clauses or new schedules relating to:

a.     employment income,

b.     the subject matter of clauses 41 to 44 and 65 to 71,

c.      capital gains tax,

d.     insurance premium tax,

e.     climate change levy, and

f.       tax avoidance and evasion.

The Committee of the Whole House will debate the above over two days. The date for this has not yet been announced, but it could be in late June, following the recess for the EU referendum.

The remaining clauses and schedules will be debated by the Public Bill Committee and the proceedings must be brought to a conclusion by 14 July 2016 (if not earlier). This is just a week before the House rises for the summer recess on 21 July 2016.

If the remaining stages (the report stage, third reading and consideration by the House of Lords) are not completed within that week, the carry over motion allows for proceedings to be resumed in the next parliamentary session. Given that party conferences will take place early in the next session, this could potentially delay Royal Assent until October 2016.

In addition to delaying the implementation of measures due to come into force from Royal Assent, the delay could also impact on deferred tax calculations as these are based on rates that have been substantively enacted.
Anonymous