Finance (No. 2) Bill Committee: New Clause 9
181Ayes
335Noes
Defeated · majority 154 · Government won138 did not vote
654 Members · Aye 181 · No 335 · DNV 138 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
On 13 January 2026, MPs voted on New Clause 9 to the Finance (No. 2) Bill during its Committee stage. The clause, proposed by opposition parties, would have amended the government's Finance Bill. The motion was defeated by 335 votes to 181, with the government successfully blocking the addition. The Finance (No. 2) Bill gives legal effect to the October 2024 Budget, covering a wide range of tax measures including changes to inheritance tax on pension assets, increases to remote gambling duties, and adjustments to employer national insurance contributions. New Clause 9 represented an attempt by opposition parties to modify the government's tax plans. Its defeat means the government's original proposals remain intact, including the application of inheritance tax to unspent pension pots from April 2027, and the near-doubling of remote gaming duty from 21% to 40%, with revenues earmarked in part for lifting the two-child benefit cap. The vote divided sharply along government versus opposition lines. All 327 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted did so against the new clause. Supporting it were 89 Conservatives, 61 Liberal Democrats, 7 SNP MPs, 5 Democratic Unionist Party members, 4 Plaid Cymru members, 4 Greens, 3 Reform UK members, and 6 independents. No Conservative or opposition party member voted against the clause. The breadth of the opposition coalition, spanning parties from the SNP to Reform UK, reflects the scale of cross-party resistance to the government's fiscal package, though that coalition was not sufficient to overcome Labour's commanding Commons majority.
Voting Aye meant
Support requiring the government to publish a formal review of how freezing income tax thresholds and savings allowances affects taxpayers, particularly those on lower incomes and retirees
Voting No meant
Oppose the review requirement, arguing the government has already published sufficient impact assessments and that the Opposition's criticism is hypocritical given they also froze thresholds when in power
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
292
69
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
89
0
27
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
61
0
11
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
34
8
Independent
—
5
4
4
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
7
0
2
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
3
0
5
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
1
0
0
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
—
1
0
0
Your 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