The MPs’, Senedd and Assembly Pension Schemes (Tax) Regulations 2025
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
12 Redress for income tax charge connected to lifetime allowance
(1) This regulation applies where a tax redress payment is made in respect of a recipient’s liability to an income tax charge under Part 9 of ITEPA 2003 where— (a) one or more benefit crystallisation events occurred in respect of a member under a relevant pension scheme in a tax year in the period beginning with 2015-16 and ending with 2023-24 (“the original events”), and (b) a charge to income tax (“the new charge”) subsequently arose in respect of that member in connection with a relevant benefit crystallisation event. (2) The qualifying amount is— (a) the amount of the new charge, less (b) both— (i) the amount that the new charge would have been if the amounts crystallised by the original events were calculated on the basis that the rectification exercise had been retrospective, and (ii) any overpaid amount that the recipient has not repaid to the relevant pension scheme. (3) In this regulation— “overpaid amount” and “recipient” have the same meaning as in regulation 10; “relevant benefit crystallisation event” has the same meaning as in section 637S of ITEPA 2003.
12 Redress for income tax charge connected to lifetime allowance
(1) This regulation applies where a tax redress payment is made in respect of a recipient’s liability to an income tax charge under Part 9 of ITEPA 2003 where— (a) one or more benefit crystallisation events occurred in respect of a member under a relevant pension scheme in a tax year in the period beginning with 2015-16 and ending with 2023-24 (“the original events”), and (b) a charge to income tax (“the new charge”) subsequently arose in respect of that member in connection with a relevant benefit crystallisation event. (2) The qualifying amount is— (a) the amount of the new charge, less (b) both— (i) the amount that the new charge would have been if the amounts crystallised by the original events were calculated on the basis that the rectification exercise had been retrospective, and (ii) any overpaid amount that the recipient has not repaid to the relevant pension scheme. (3) In this regulation— “overpaid amount” and “recipient” have the same meaning as in regulation 10; “relevant benefit crystallisation event” has the same meaning as in section 637S of ITEPA 2003.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.