Budget Resolution No. 4: Income tax (dividend rates)
371
Ayes
—
166
Noes
Passed · Government won
111 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** On 2 December 2025, the House of Commons voted to approve Budget Resolution No. 4, which set the income tax rates applied to dividend income, meaning the returns people receive from owning shares in companies. The resolution passed by 371 votes to 166, with the government's position carrying the day comfortably. **Why it matters:** Dividend tax rates determine how much income tax is paid on money received as dividends, typically by shareholders and investors. By approving this resolution, Parliament gave effect to the government's proposed rates as announced in the Budget. The vote locks in the tax treatment of investment income for the coming fiscal period, affecting individuals who receive income from share ownership, including small investors, directors of owner-managed businesses who pay themselves partly through dividends, and larger shareholders. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs provided 352 of the 371 aye votes, joined by smaller parties including Plaid Cymru, the Greens, and the SDLP. The Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Reform UK, and the DUP all voted against, contributing 163 of the 166 no votes, with three independents also opposing. There were no Conservative or Liberal Democrat ayes and no Labour noes, indicating tight party discipline on both sides. The result sits within a broader pattern of the government pressing through its autumn Budget fiscal package, with related divisions in the weeks before and after covering employer national insurance contributions and industrial financial assistance also producing clear government majorities.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's proposed dividend tax rates as part of the 2025 Budget package
Voting No meant
Oppose the government's proposed dividend tax rates, likely arguing they are too high, harm investors and small business owners, or are economically damaging
537 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 111 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
312
0
50
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
91
25
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
59
13
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
40
0
2
Independent
8
3
2
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped No
0
8
—
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
5
—
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4
0
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
2
0
—
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
—
Your Party
1
0
—
Budget is morally necessary investment to lift children from poverty, rebuild NHS as public service, and tackle public health crisis; lifting two-child cap is paid for by tax avoidance crackdowns and gambling tax.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,668 words) →
Budget is a tax grab on working people without real reform plan; NHS waiting lists falling far too slowly; government failed to resolve strikes and has no credible social care strategy.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,779 words) →
Budget treads water on NHS; unclear how medicine price increases and reorganisation costs will be paid; calls for EU customs union and better GP access rather than tax rises.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (2,898 words) →
Budget is progressive and fair; lifting two-child cap will reduce child poverty by 500,000; tax reforms on wealthy and investment in employment support are sound policy.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (917 words) →
NHS frontline staff at St Thomas' hospital deserve recognition for managing through strikes; government must prevent further strike action.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (89 words) →
Budget lacks growth measures and imposes stealth taxes on working people; freeze on income tax thresholds and EV tax burden rural constituencies disproportionately.Independent · Voted no · Read full speech (714 words) →
Strongly defends two-child cap removal as moral imperative; criticizes Opposition for opposing child poverty relief despite UK being wealthy nation.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (543 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0