National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: Third Reading
316
Ayes
—
194
Noes
Passed · Government won
136 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 21 January 2026 to pass the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill at its Third Reading, the final stage of Commons approval before a bill proceeds to the House of Lords. The result was 316 votes in favour and 194 against. The bill passed comfortably, carried by Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voting unanimously in support, along with four Green Party MPs. The bill amends the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 to create a power allowing employer and employee national insurance contributions to be applied to salary sacrifice pension contributions above £2,000 per year, starting from April 2029. Salary sacrifice is an arrangement where employees give up part of their salary in exchange for pension contributions made by their employer, currently free of national insurance. The change would cap the amount on which this tax advantage applies. The government argued that the cost to the Treasury of salary sacrifice pension schemes was on course to nearly treble by 2030, from £2.8 billion in 2017 to £8 billion, making reform necessary to protect public finances. The vote divided along clear party lines. All voting Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Scottish National Party, Democratic Unionist Party, Plaid Cymru, and Reform UK MPs voted against the bill. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously in favour, with no rebels on either side. The four Green MPs supported the government. The bill subsequently went to the Lords, where amendments were passed, and the Commons later voted on 23 March 2026 to disagree with five Lords amendments, in each case by margins of around 280 to 160.
Voting Aye meant
Support passing the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill, which caps pension contributions under salary sacrifice arrangements at £2,000
Voting No meant
Oppose the bill, arguing it attacks pension saving and disproportionately harms basic rate taxpayers, younger workers, and middle-income earners
510 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 136 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
279
0
83
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
100
16
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
67
5
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
31
0
11
Independent
2
4
7
Scottish National PartyWhipped No
0
8
1
Reform UKWhipped No
0
4
4
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
5
—
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4
0
—
Plaid CymruWhipped No
0
4
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
1
—
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
—
Your Party
1
0
—
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 no · Read full speech (3,086 words) →
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 aye · Read full speech (2,373 words) →
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 no · Read full speech (1,053 words) →
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 aye · Read full speech (259 words) →
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 no · Read full speech (106 words) →
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 no · Read full speech (52 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0