Finance Bill Committee: New Clause 7
104
Ayes
—
313
Noes
Defeated · Government lost
231 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** On 11 December 2024, the House of Commons voted on New Clause 7 during the Committee stage of the Finance Bill. The clause, tabled by the opposition, sought to modify the government's approach to the removal of VAT exemption on private school fees, one of the flagship tax measures introduced following the October 2024 Budget. The amendment was defeated by 313 votes to 104. **Why it matters:** The underlying policy at stake is the removal of the longstanding VAT exemption on private school fees, which takes effect from 1 January 2025. The government projects this will raise approximately 460 million pounds in additional revenue in 2024-25, with that funding directed towards state education, including a 2.3 billion pound increase to the core schools budget. Critics argued the change would harm pupils with special educational needs and disabilities who attend independent schools without education, health and care plans, damage small and faith schools with thin financial margins, and disrupt community partnerships between independent and state schools. Supporters argued it removes a tax relief that disproportionately benefits a small and relatively affluent portion of the population, and redirects resources to benefit all children. **The politics:** The vote divided sharply along party lines. All 276 Labour MPs and 31 Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted sided with the government against the amendment. The Conservatives provided 96 of the 104 Aye votes, with Reform UK contributing 4 and a handful of independents and smaller unionist parties making up the remainder. The Greens voted with the government. There were no significant cross-party rebellions. The debate forms part of the broader legislative passage of the Finance Bill, which subsequently passed its Third Reading in March 2025 by 339 votes to 172, confirming the government's stable majority on Budget measures throughout the bill's progress.
Voting Aye meant
Support raising Capital Gains Tax rates as part of a broader effort to restore public finances and make the tax system fairer for those who earn income through work
Voting No meant
Oppose the CGT rate increases, arguing they will deter investment, damage entrepreneurship and wealth creation, and ultimately harm economic growth
417 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 231 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
0
276
86
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
96
0
20
Liberal Democrats
0
0
72
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0
31
11
Independent
4
2
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped Aye
4
0
3
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
1
0
4
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
—
Your Party
0
0
1
Defends VAT removal as necessary to raise £1.5bn for state education investment; argues schools can minimise fee increases and that government has compensated SEND pupils with EHCPs and military families via continuity of education allowance.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (4,534 words) →
Opposes VAT on private school fees as a cruel, ideological tax imposed mid-year that will damage education of 37,000 pupils and particularly harm SEND pupils without EHCPs, small rural schools, and faith schools; calls for new clause 8 to review impact.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,696 words) →
Opposes the tax on principle; supports new clause 9 requiring impact assessment on SEND pupils without EHCPs, warning 100,000 such pupils will face fee rises and families may seek EHCPs to avoid VAT, straining the already-failed SEND system.Liberal Democrat · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,053 words) →
Supports removal of VAT exemption as fair redistribution from wealthiest to fund state education crisis; notes private school spending per pupil is 90% higher than state sector and fees have risen 55% since 2003.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (905 words) →
Opposes as bad policy that taxes education contrary to global norm; argues Government's 37,000 pupil displacement estimate is mathematically flawed, ignores capital costs, and will disproportionately displace SEND and faith school pupils.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,799 words) →
Supports as part of philosophy that those with broadest shoulders carry heaviest load; argues 6% at private schools vs 50% using state education justifies the measure to fund prosperity for all.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,027 words) →
Opposes as tax on aspiration that harms ordinary working families (nurses, tradespeople, small business owners) who sacrificed to afford independent schools; criticises lack of proper impact assessment and mid-year implementation.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (674 words) →
Opposes as divisive framing that pits schoolchild against schoolchild; argues Government wrongly suggests not taxing private fees takes money from state schools, when UK spends £1trn+ annually and can choose priorities.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (750 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0