(Except clauses 11, 18, 40, 43, 44 and 69 and schedule 8)
Finance Bill
2:00 pm
Mark Field (Shadow Minister, Treasury; Cities of London and Westminster, Conservative)
I confess that I am comforted by some of the Economic Secretary's words on amendment No. 109, although I have to say that we Conservative Committee members are slightly cynical, given that the Minister bemoans the fact that the Treasury has had repeatedly to legislate in this area. Might not that suggest that the Government have not listened to representations, from my party and others, that have been made during past Finance Bills?
I accept that this area is complex and that, as the Minister rightly says, there will be an opportunity to consider the issue again if urgent action needs to be taken as a result of the potential difficulties that life assurance companies will face. The nature of the regulation on them, it has to be accepted, is slightly different from that applying to any other company. Although I appreciate that the idea is to link that with the general capital gains tax, the nature of the assurance and life insurance business is such that all too often the importance of maintaining reserves means that the transfer is not normal—whether from A to B, from C to D or whatever other letters may have been in the Minister's examples.
I accept what the Minister said about amendment No. 110. Given how it is couched, our amendment would potentially be open to abuse and go well beyond the subsidiary relationships that we had in mind. I am comforted in part that the Minister will take on board some of the concerns that we raised. With that in mind, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.