Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 13B
301
Ayes
—
167
Noes
Passed · Government won
178 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 31 March 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 13B to the Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill, passing the motion to disagree by 301 votes to 167. The amendment, which had been passed by the House of Lords, would have modified the tax treatment of private schools under the business rates system. By voting to reject it, the Commons maintained the government's original approach to how private schools are taxed under the reformed business rates framework. The practical effect of this vote is to keep in place the government's intended policy of removing the charitable rate relief that private schools have historically enjoyed on their business rates. This forms part of a broader effort to increase the tax burden on fee-charging independent schools, with the revenues intended to fund improvements to state education. The vote directly affects the roughly 2,500 independent schools across England that currently benefit from charitable status exemptions on non-domestic rates, as well as the families who use them and the state school pupils whose education the government says will benefit from redirected funds. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously in favour of rejecting the Lords amendment, providing the government's majority of 301. Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Reform UK, Democratic Unionist Party, Ulster Unionist Party, and Traditional Unionist Voice MPs all voted against, totalling 167 Noes, with no notable cross-party rebels in either direction. Three Green Party MPs and three Independents voted with the government. The vote is part of a sequence of ping-pong divisions on the same bill on the same day, in which the Commons consistently reasserted its position against Lords amendments seeking to soften or alter the private schools provisions, reflecting the government's determination to pass this flagship education and tax policy intact.
Voting Aye meant
Support rejecting the Lords amendment, keeping the Bill's higher multiplier for properties above £500,000 even where this creates a steep tax increase at the threshold
Voting No meant
Support the Lords amendment, which aimed to protect businesses near the £500,000 rateable value threshold from a near-doubling of their rates bill when they marginally cross it
468 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 178 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
261
0
101
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
92
24
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
63
9
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
36
0
6
Independent
3
2
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped No
0
5
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
3
0
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
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
—
Your Party
0
0
1
Government must reject Lords amendments as they duplicate existing powers and undermine the funding mechanism for permanent RHL relief; the higher multiplier on 1% of properties is necessary and sustainable.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,990 words) →
Lords amendments should be accepted; the £500,000 threshold is a blunt instrument that punishes aspiration, harms healthcare, retailers and high streets, and creates unfair cliff-edge effects for growing businesses.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (927 words) →
Support business rates reform but concerned about hospitals and businesses near the threshold being caught; private schools should not be taxed on education.Liberal Democrats · Voted no · Read full speech (575 words) →
Opposes removal of charitable relief from private and faith schools as it unfairly disadvantages parents seeking faith-based education and disproportionately affects faith communities.DUP · Voted no · Read full speech (1,130 words) →
Questions the disjointed approach of funding NHS while simultaneously taxing health services through business rates.Unknown · Voted no · Read full speech (62 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0