Finance (No. 2) Bill Committee: New Clause 7

Monday, 12 January 2026 · Division No. 402 · Commons

188Ayes
341Noes
Defeated

119 MPs did not vote

rightGovernment defeatedPro Family Farm Protection(Yes)Anti Inheritance Tax Increase(Yes)Pro Agricultural Relief(Yes)Fiscal Responsibility(No)

Voting Yes means

Support requiring an annual assessment of uprating the APR allowance to keep pace with rising agricultural land values, protecting family farms from the long-term erosion of inheritance tax relief

Voting No means

Oppose the amendment, backing the government's position that the APR changes as designed are sufficient and that a mandatory annual review of the allowance is unnecessary

What happened: On 12 January 2026, the House of Commons sitting as a Committee of the whole House voted on New Clause 7 to the Finance (No. 2) Bill, an amendment put forward by the opposition. The clause was defeated by 341 votes to 188. The government's position was to reject the amendment and maintain the Bill as drafted.

Why it matters: The Finance (No. 2) Bill makes significant changes to how income from assets is taxed in the United Kingdom, including a 2 percentage point increase in dividend tax rates and new higher rates applying to property income. New Clause 7 was one of several opposition amendments seeking to modify or challenge these measures. Its defeat means the government's approach to taxing savings, dividends, and property income proceeds without the changes the opposition proposed. The Bill also extends the freeze on income tax thresholds to the end of the decade, a policy known as fiscal drag, under which rising wages push more people into higher tax bands without any change in the headline rates themselves.

The politics: The vote divided almost entirely along government-versus-opposition lines, with all 335 Labour and Labour-Co-operative MPs who voted opposing the amendment. Conservatives (97 votes), Liberal Democrats (65), the Scottish National Party (9), the Democratic Unionist Party (5), Plaid Cymru (4), Reform UK (2), and the Greens (2) all voted in favour of the amendment. The debate reflected sharp disagreement over whether taxing dividend and property income more heavily discourages enterprise and saving or simply closes a gap between how earned and unearned income are treated. The vote sits alongside a series of related divisions in early 2026 in which the government successfully overturned Lords amendments to the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill, underlining a broader pattern of the government defending its autumn Budget tax package against opposition from both chambers.

How They Voted

Government position: No

Labour PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/300 No
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
97 Aye/0 No
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
65 Aye/0 No
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/35 No
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
9 Aye/0 No
Independent
3 Aye/4 No
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
5 Aye/0 No
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Reform UK
2 Aye/0 No
Green Party of England and Wales
2 Aye/0 No
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
1 Aye/0 No
Traditional Unionist Voice
1 Aye/0 No
Ulster Unionist Party
1 Aye/0 No
Your Party
0 Aye/1 No

What They Said in the Debate

Gareth Davies

Conservative · Grantham and Bourne

Opposed

Bill represents broken manifesto promises and a 'war on landlords,' savers, and small businesses; threshold freeze and asset income tax hikes total £23 billion and will harm ordinary working people and enterprise culture.

Voted Aye

Daisy Cooper

Liberal Democrat · St Albans

Opposed

Tax changes add unwarranted complexity, burden small businesses, risk unintended rental market consequences, and strain HMRC resources; impact assessments essential before implementation.

Voted Aye

Kit Malthouse

Conservative · North West Hampshire

Opposed

Changes overtax risk and enterprise, destroying incentive culture; dividend taxation contradicts government's own growth objectives and continues damaging trend of taxing return on investment.

Voted Aye

Jim Shannon

DUP · Strangford

Opposed

Tax changes hit lower and middle-income families unfairly; 4.8 million more individuals will pay higher rate and 600,000 will enter additional rate, while millionaires can afford it.

Voted Aye

Sir Julian Lewis

Conservative · New Forest East

Neutral

Government claims of fairness contradicted by numerous U-turns since Budget announcement; questions credibility of stated good effects.

Voted Aye

Dan Tomlinson

Labour · Chipping Barnet

Supportive

Government measures are fair, necessary, and progressive; they raise revenue from those undertaxed relative to employees while protecting public services and maintaining lowest borrowing levels.

Voted No

Dr Jeevun Sandher

Labour · Loughborough

Supportive

Dividend tax increase is right because wealth taxation has not kept pace with economic change; comparative evidence from France shows it encourages reinvestment and is easily implementable.

Voted No

Related Votes