National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1

Monday, 23 March 2026 · Division No. 454 · Commons

280Ayes
161Noes
Passed

204 MPs did not vote

leftGovernment wonPro Tax On Employer Benefits(Yes)Anti Salary Sacrifice Ni Exemption(Yes)Pro Pension Saving Incentives(No)Fiscal Responsibility(Yes)

Voting Yes means

Support the government's plan to increase National Insurance on employer pension contributions made via salary sacrifice, rejecting the Lords' amendment

Voting No means

Support the Lords' amendment, opposing the government's extension of National Insurance to employer pension contributions under salary sacrifice arrangements

Parliament voted on 23 March 2026 to reject Lords Amendment 1 to the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill, by 280 votes to 161. The amendment had been passed by the House of Lords and represented the upper chamber's primary challenge to the bill's central measure: applying national insurance contributions to employer pension contributions made through salary sacrifice arrangements, subject to a £2,000 annual cap per employee. By voting to disagree with the Lords, the government maintained its original policy intact.

The vote matters because it clears the way for a new tax on a widely used workplace pension saving mechanism. Under salary sacrifice, employees and employers jointly arrange for part of a worker's salary to be paid directly into a pension, a route that has historically been exempt from employer national insurance. The bill ends that exemption on contributions above the £2,000 cap, with the change due to take effect from 2029. Opponents argued the policy would discourage pension saving among low and middle-income workers, increase administrative burdens on small businesses and charities, and risk widening the pension gap over time. The government argued that all workers retain strong incentives to save for retirement, that the existing £70 billion-a-year tax relief system remains largely intact, and that the revenue is necessary to fund public services without cuts to the NHS or welfare.

The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 277 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the government, with no rebels. The Conservatives (88 votes), Liberal Democrats (54), Scottish National Party (6), Democratic Unionist Party (5), Reform UK (4), Plaid Cymru (2) and Traditional Unionist Voice (1) all voted against. Three independents voted on each side. The same pattern was repeated across four further divisions held on the same day, as the government rejected Lords Amendments 2, 3, 5 and 6 by similar margins, defeating a range of Lords proposals including exemptions for small and medium-sized enterprises and charities.

How They Voted

Government position: Aye

Labour PartyWhipped Aye
249 Aye/0 No
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/88 No
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0 Aye/54 No
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
28 Aye/0 No
Independent
3 Aye/3 No
Scottish National PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/6 No
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/5 No
Reform UKWhipped No
0 Aye/4 No
Plaid Cymru
0 Aye/2 No
Social Democratic and Labour Party
1 Aye/0 No
Traditional Unionist Voice
0 Aye/1 No
Ulster Unionist Party
0 Aye/1 No
Your Party
1 Aye/0 No

What They Said in the Debate

Mark Garnier

Conservative · Wyre Forest

Opposed

Opposes the Bill entirely and supports most Lords amendments; argues the cap will harm 858,000 basic-rate taxpayers and may cause employers to abandon salary sacrifice altogether, damaging pensions adequacy.

Voted No

Charlie Maynard

Liberal Democrat · Witney

Opposed

Opposes the Bill and supports Lords amendments, particularly raising the cap to £5,000; argues the £2,000 threshold will hit modest-income savers and the timing (2029) appears designed to manage fiscal rules rather than be genuine policy.

Voted No

Sir Ashley Fox

Conservative · Bridgwater

Opposed

Challenges the government as unfairly raising taxes on savers while increasing welfare spending; questions the integrity of using the policy to fund other priorities.

Voted No

Jim Shannon

DUP · Strangford

Questioning

Questions whether the Bill creates a financial disincentive for middle-income earners and may increase pensioner poverty, asking if this risks creating a pensions gap and higher state costs.

Voted No

Torsten Bell

Labour · Swansea West

Supportive

Supports the Bill and rejects all Lords amendments; argues the £2,000 cap is pragmatic, protects 90% of lower earners, and necessary to control spiralling tax relief costs while maintaining strong pension incentives.

Voted Aye

Chris Vince

Labour · Harlow

Supportive

Supports the Bill; argues the government should focus on low earners who cannot afford to save, not tax reliefs for higher earners, and notes concern about the pension gap is more relevant to wage levels than tax changes.

Voted Aye

Related Votes