Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more


  • Comment
LORDS: Hansard 22 July: Column 1127 ...
LORDS: Hansard 22 July: Column 1127

The Urban Task Force recommendation that VAT rates on new build and on repair and refurbishment should be harmonised will have to be tested against the realities of European law, government spokesman Lord McIntosh of Haringey told peers.

He was speaking in a debate initiated by Viscount Gage who asked if the government would consider lowering the rate of VAT rate on repairs to listed buildings. The minister replied: 'No European agreements mean that we cannot introduce a reduced VAT rate for repairs to listed buildings as such. It is government policy to offer financial assistance to the heritage through targeted conservation grants and capital taxation relief'.

Labour Baroness Maddock said it was urgent that the government should examine the discrepancy of nil VAT on new build, but VAT on the refurbishment of all types of older buildings. 'If we are serious about urban renaissance and protecting our countryside, we need to examine this issue', she added.

She asked the minister to reassure the house that the government would examine urgently the recommendation of Lord Rogers' task force that VAT should be harmonised across the two sectors and that some of money raised should be put into urban renaissance projects.

However, Lord McIntosh replied:'The government's response to the report will have to take account of the realities of EuropeanVAT legislation...The distinction between repairs and improvements, although it may be anomalous, is not a distinction between greenfield and brownfield sites. It is not an urban/rural issue. It is an issue that arose because the then Chancellor[Nigel Lawson], after 10 years' experience of the tax, came to the conclusion that it was not possible to make a realistic and firm distinction between repairs and improvements which was enforceable in law'.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.