A divisionDivision No. 414 · Wednesday, 21 January 2026· Commons· Taxation

National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill Committee: Amendment 5

191Ayes
326Noes
Defeated · majority 135 · Government won
132 did not vote
Aye192No325DID NOT VOTE · 132

649 Members · Aye 191 · No 326 · DNV 132 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 21 January 2026 on Amendment 5 to the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill at committee stage. The amendment, tabled by Conservative MP Mark Garnier, would have exempted basic rate taxpayers in England, Wales and Scotland from the new £2,000 annual cap on National Insurance Contributions-free salary sacrifice pension contributions, restricting the cap to higher and additional rate taxpayers only. The amendment was defeated by 326 votes to 191. The bill as a whole introduces NICs charges on employer pension contributions made via salary sacrifice arrangements above £2,000 per year, taking effect from April 2029. Had Amendment 5 passed, lower-earning workers paying the basic rate of income tax would have retained the ability to sacrifice unlimited salary into their pension without triggering NICs charges. The government argued the £2,000 cap already protects the vast majority of basic rate taxpayers, with Pensions Minister Torsten Bell citing that 95% of those earning under £30,000 would be unaffected. He also argued that exempting basic rate taxpayers would be difficult to implement because employers often cannot know which staff will end up as basic rate payers until late in the tax year. All 290 Labour MPs and 31 Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted went through the No lobby, with no crossover. The Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, SNP, DUP, Plaid Cymru, Reform UK and Traditional Unionist Voice all voted Aye, forming a broad cross-opposition front. No Labour MP voted for the amendment and no opposition party voted against it.

Voting Aye meant
Support exempting basic rate taxpayers from the £2,000 salary sacrifice pension cap, protecting lower earners' ability to save into workplace pensions without incurring National Insurance charges.
Voting No meant
Oppose the exemption, arguing the £2,000 cap already protects 95% of those earning under £30,000 and that a basic-rate exemption would be unworkable in practice and cost more in foregone revenue than the defence budget.
§ 01Who voted how.517 voting Members · 132 absent

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
290
71
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
97
0
19
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
66
0
5
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
31
11
Independent
5
3
5
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
8
0
1
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
4
0
4
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
0
0
1
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

§ 02From the debate.6 principal speakers
Mark GarnierOpposedWyre Forest
Opposes the Bill as regressive, harming lower earners and graduates disproportionately; argues the £2,000 cap should exempt basic rate taxpayers and be indexed to inflation.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,086 words)
Torsten BellSupportiveSwansea West
Supports the Bill as pragmatic and necessary reform to control salary sacrifice costs rising from £2.8bn to £8bn by 2030; defends the £2,000 cap as affecting only 5% of lower earners.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,373 words)
Charlie MaynardOpposedWitney
Opposes the Bill, citing lack of impact assessments, burden on small businesses, and disincentive to pension saving; supports amendment requiring publication of lifetime pension value impacts.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,053 words)
Chris VinceSupportiveHarlow
Supports the Bill; emphasizes need to address cost-of-living crisis and that many constituents cannot afford pensions; agrees the salary sacrifice cost is unsustainable.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (259 words)
Jim ShannonOpposedStrangford
Agrees with Conservative criticism that the Bill attacks younger people and families; views it as harmful to those with aspirations for the future.Democratic Unionist Party · Voted aye · Read full speech (106 words)
Sir Ashley FoxOpposedBridgwater
Challenges the Minister on the inequity of the cap, questioning how withdrawing 17% relief from basic rate taxpayers with student loans is pragmatic.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (52 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0