Finance (No. 2) Bill Committee: New Clause 24
184Ayes
331Noes
Defeated · majority 147 · Government won136 did not vote
651 Members · Aye 184 · No 331 · DNV 136 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 13 January 2026 on New Clause 24 to the Finance (No. 2) Bill, which would have required HMRC to publish comprehensive guidance on the new inheritance tax charges on unused pension funds within six months of the Bill passing, and to establish a dedicated helpline for queries related to those charges. The Committee rejected the new clause by 331 votes to 184, with the government's position prevailing. The vote concerned a practical dimension of the government's policy, introduced through clauses 63 to 68 of the Bill, to bring unspent pension assets within the scope of inheritance tax for deaths occurring after 6 April 2027. The new clause would have placed a statutory duty on HMRC to produce guidance and set up a specific helpline before the policy took effect. Its rejection means no such legal requirement exists, and HMRC will instead follow its standard practice of publishing guidance and training helpline staff ahead of the implementation date, without a formal legislative deadline or a dedicated telephone service. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. Labour MPs voted uniformly against, providing all 331 noes. Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, the SNP, the DUP, Plaid Cymru, and most smaller parties voted in favour. Reform UK provided only 2 of their 8 MPs, with the remaining 6 having no vote recorded. No Labour member crossed the floor. The division sits within a broader legislative contest over the government's inheritance tax reforms, which also cover agricultural and business property relief, and comes alongside related parliamentary activity on employer national insurance contributions on pension contributions earlier in 2026.
Voting Aye meant
Support requiring HMRC to publish dedicated guidance and set up a specific helpline to help individuals and administrators navigate the new inheritance tax on pension assets, citing complexity and administrative burden on estates.
Voting No meant
Oppose the new clause as unnecessary, arguing HMRC will publish guidance and train helpline staff as a matter of course before the policy takes effect in April 2027, making a statutory requirement redundant.
Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.
Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped No
0
288
73
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
93
0
23
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
63
0
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
34
8
Independent
—
5
5
3
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
9
0
0
Reform UK
—
2
0
6
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
—
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
1
0
0
Restore Britain
—
1
0
0
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
1
0
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
1
0
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Defended pension inheritance tax and gambling duty increases as fair, necessary reforms aligned with fiscal responsibility; rejected Opposition new clauses on grounds that monitoring occurs through normal processes and guidance will be published in spring 2027.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (6,536 words) →
Opposed pension inheritance tax extension and gambling duty hikes as undisclosed tax increases that penalise saving, add administrative complexity for personal representatives, and risk black market migration; called for proper consultation and early guidance.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,937 words) →
Supported gambling duty increases but warned that pension changes create personal liability risks for executors, cause delays in inheritance payouts, and lack proper transitional protections; flagged technical definition mismatch on free bets tax base.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,547 words) →
Strongly supported both pension and gambling tax measures as addressing long-standing unfairness; framed gambling companies as exploiting addictive technologies and evading tax through offshoring.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (702 words) →
Advocated for gambling duty increases as fair taxation of harmful online products; argued online sector generates disproportionate profits relative to employment and should contribute to harm costs.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,495 words) →
Supported new clause 25 requiring impact assessment; warned that 40% remote gaming duty risks pushing users to unregulated black market and may undermine gambling harm prevention funding transitions.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (925 words) →
Acknowledged gambling harm concerns but warned that tax increases risk significant job losses in constituency home to bet365 (7,500 employees); cautioned against framing as moral crusade when tax revenue goes to general budget.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,632 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0