Forum menu
It was only about 22% so hardly everyone !!
Yes of course, but enough to win them a large majority.
I'm actually quietly impressed by that budget. Really don't know why Starmer boxed himself into a corner with the promise of no tax rises for workers but you can't deny the scale and reach of it. Would have liked to see higher CGT rates and wealth taxes on second homes etc but it's tipped the balance both in terms of spending and taxation and more importantly it changes the optics of what govt should be doing. Instead of fiddling at the edges and finding reasons not to do anything this budget shows Labour do want to make big decisions and do big things. We can argue about the detail but this IMO is the most important change from life under the tories.
I’m disappointed to see no increased focus on tax avoidance and closing the loopholes.
Non-dom status abolished and replaced with new residence-based system from April 2025
on the face of it good news. However because I’m a cynic I will await with interest to see if it’s just a name change or if they actually creates a material increased tax liability for those with non dorms status
All seems fairly benign in the end. I'm pleased because it wasn't as bad as I was expecting. Maybe that was the plan all along? Hopefully that's the bad news budget out of the way and we can let the good times roll from now on
Removal of business rates charitable relief from April 2025
Employer NICs increasing from 13.8% to 15% from April 2025
Secondary Threshold for employer NICs reduced from £9,100 to £5,000
As a modest size charity, that is going to sting for my work.
Fiscal drag on your income tax for another three years. Blaming the previous government for not making a change of course. The proportion paying 40% income tax will continue to rise. https://ifs.org.uk/publications/deepening-freeze-more-adults-ever-are-paying-higher-rate-tax
In a roundabout way I'm happy with this. Incentivizes me to plough it into the pension and retire early (maybe not the best to the overall economy though).
Thanks to fiscal drag I think it’s now possible to have a below average household income (eg one partner on £55k and the other part time on £10k with a few kids in tow) and yet be paying higher rate tax.
Maybe, but in that hypothetical scenario the difference between them and a household with two full time incomes is offset against the savings in childcare? Also the higher earning partner in that example is only paying ~£1k more because it's a marginal rate.
Google “mileage correction services”. For something which should be pretty rare (switching motors between cars and similar) there are a lot of companies providing it. It would require significant effort from the car companies (which then leaves a question about all the old cars) to make this a secure option.
I suppose for the most blatant cases there's ANPR.
Fraud will always be an issue, just like you could avoid paying road tax today by cloning someone else's number plate. I suppose you could then prosecute "mileage correction" in the same way you would a dodgy accountant.
Fuel duty frozen and 5p cut extended for one year
Bonkers considering fuel is so cheap right now. But I suppose politically it keeps tax rises hidden from "working people". They could have at least brought it back and said it's being hypothecated into fixing potholes and subsidizing bus fares.
that perceived unfairness only exists because the higher rate tax threshold exists. Arguably the higher rate tax threshold itself is unfair, at least insofar as where it’s now positioned.
I think we all need to get used to the idea of paying more tax to pay for more services (i.e. longer retirements and more advanced healthcare). Maybe think of it the other way round, 40% is heading to be the new normal and there's a discount for lower incomes.
But also bear in mind that just because the 'average' (for middle aged men) is knocking on the threshold, that means that they're not actually paying it (or much of it).
The Shadow Treasury Minister Gareth Davies has just been taken apart by Matt Chorley on Five Live. Dear god, what a dimwit.
He moaned about Labour raising taxes, then when asked how the huge amount of money that the last government hadn't budgeted for would have been raised by a Tory government he kept repeating that they would use 'budgetry methods' to plug the yawning gap
To which he was given the obvious next question 'you mean you'd raise taxes?'. He then just kept repeating 'no, we'd use budgetry methods' and the interview then went round in circles
If thats the best the Tories can muster in reply...
Fuel duty frozen and 5p cut extended for one year
Bonkers considering fuel is so cheap right now.
If you did a straw poll of the general population, I think yours would be a somewhat minority viewpoint there.
If you're on minimum wage and need to drive to work and back every day, I doubt you'd be marvelling at how little it was costing you
I know its a somewhat false equivelence (due to various circumstances) but during covid a litre of unleaded dipped below a quid a litre. Its now £1.35 a litre. Thats a pretty substantial increase in the price of filling a tank over a 3 year period, far outstripping wage growth. Any government would have to be mad to bang another 5-7p a litre on top of that. The usual suspects in the press would go into absolute meltdown!
hypothecated
Every day's a school day. <Thumbs up.>
I bet it increases the number of people claiming benefits and the number of unemployed will go up , small businesses will suffer. Not sure how it encourages growth
It’s a monumental change in direction and focus to a high tax state. An extra £40bn revenue. Only unfortunately £1bn (peanuts) going to the NHS
during covid a litre of unleaded dipped below a quid a litre.
did it really? I don't remember that. I remember it hitting £2/L when Ukraine kicked off
I’m actually quietly impressed by that budget.
Me too. I mean I do feel sorry for the landowners, second home owners, people who are going to inherit enough money to pay inheritance tax and private jet users, obviously, but other than that....
Well this is disappointing.
So many told us that we would pay per mile, that the working man would have their tax increased, that they wanted rid of bus fare cap and they’d not tax the rich. Now I don’t know who to believe, the Daily Mail, Reform voters or Labour.
Overall I quite impressed with what they’ve come up with.
If you did a straw poll of the general population, I think yours would be a somewhat minority viewpoint there.
If you’re on minimum wage and need to drive to work and back every day, I doubt you’d be marvelling at how little it was costing you
a) just shows how unfair the system of enforced car ownership is. Make public transport better. It should be the default like public healthcare or state education.
b) it's ~135p the same price now as it was 10 years ago, I was going to say "as when Labour were last in power, but the price rose quickly over 3 years from ~118 to ~138 due to the financial crisis so It's about 6 months too late to say Gordon Brown was in power . Adjusted for inflation, hasn't been this cheap since 1998. And that was on the tail end of falling (inflation adjusted) petrol prices from the late 80's to mid 90's.
Petrol prices adjusted for inflation by year in a table:
www.speedlimit.org.uk/petrolprices.html
On a graph:
ww.racfoundation.org/data/uk-pump-prices-over-time
Only unfortunately £1bn (peanuts) going to the NHS
Someone will be asking to fact check me but I'm fairly sure it's much more than that?
The lack of fuel duty increase is just incredibly regressive. Fuel now is £1.35 /L(ish). In 2022, it was nearly £2 /L, even with the 5p "temporary" tax cut put in place during Covid.
Increasing the bus fare cap to £3 saves £350m (compared to keeping it at £2).
Keeping fuel duty as is will cost £20bn. Even just a commitment to raise it in line with inflation would have been nice. I despair.
The absolute bollocks about "the working people" and "the hard-pressed motorist". Never seems to translate to "the working people" who get the bus or the train.
The absolute bollocks about “the working people” and “the hard-pressed motorist”. Never seems to translate to “the working people” who get the bus or the train.
You're right, but it's a very politically savvy move. When it comes to budgets the vast majority of people look for two things more than anything else, the price of petrol, and the price of booze. Put those up and you're onto a loser from day one.
Never seems to translate to “the working people” who get the bus or the train.
Nationalise the trains! Get buses back under local government control! Oh ... they are ... sweet.
As for fuel duty... I'd agree the fuel price escalator should be restarted ASAP... except there is a very good chance that oil/petrol/diesel prices will shoot up again this winter... a delay seems like wise planning... a sensible precaution.
Generally... this budget is the government getting on with doing what they said they would... inline with the priorities they set out.. all be it in a sensible and cautious way... no rushing... no sidelining the Treasury and OBR... no big surprises... just starting the shift needed, and beginning to repair some of the damage done to us (and by us) over recent years.
did it really? I don’t remember that. I remember it hitting £2/L when Ukraine kicked off
It did, briefly, when the whole world was pretty much in lockdown and not driving anywhere so unless you were on the governments fast lane as a sales rep for PPE or flying a in a private jet you probably didn't notice. At one point the price of crude went negative because there was excessive supply and everyone's strategic reserves were full so they couldn't support the price any further.
Using that blip as a baseline is being really picky with stats though. As pointed out, you could use the £2 (well, 170ish not on the motorway) figure with more validity because people actually had to pay that to get to work.
Make public transport better. It should be the default like public healthcare or state education.
Yes, but presently it isn't 'better'. Its the opposite of 'better'. In towns like the one I live in it is catastrophically awful after decades of underinvestment and cutting of services. Ask anyone in Greater Manchester if they'd be happy to rely on the 'service' provided by Northern Rail to get into work every day and they'll laugh in your face. Thats the present reality.
I can't actually get to work using public transport. It simply isn't possible. Unless I fancy spending 5 hours a day on various buses (GMPTE Journey Planner tells me it would involve 2 buses, then a tram then another bus to travel 14 miles). No thanks. So I have to drive. As does every one of the millions an millions of people in this country who effectively don't have access to any public transport worthy of the name.
So thats the reality. And its going to take a great deal of time and investment to fix. But I was impressed with the anoiuncement of some actual investment in the transport infrasructure in the north of England. Thats certainly something we've not had for a very, very long time. And, of course, the railways are effectively going to be nationalised, and they're also devolving control over bus srvices to local councils like they've just done in Manchester, so its all good. definitely a step in the right direction IMHO
The Beeb have done a simple breakdown for the likes of me.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx25w7qpr0yo
Dont go into the comments section though, “there be dragons.” ?
As a modest size charity, that is going to sting for my work.
The removal of business rates for charitable status is only for Private schools iirc
fairly sure it’s much more than that?
well yes it is. £1.2bn
Increase in taxation of £40bn. Increased spending of £60bn
I can’t actually get to work using public transport. It simply isn’t possible. Unless I fancy spending 5 hours a day on various buses. No thanks. So I have to drive. As does every one of the millions an millions of people in this country who effectively don’t have access to any public transport worthy of the name.
Manchester transport is uniquely s*** though.
When I was there I hypothesized that it's because When London's population hit ~2.5million in around 1850 they started to build the London underground as the exciting transport project of the future that brought the satellite towns into the suburbs. When Manchester hit 2.5million roughly 100 years later it built the M62 and did the opposite. I don't know why they both invested in expensive transport schemes at that point i their growth but for some reason they did.
n.b. as part of the whole post war rebuilding that resulted in the M62, London was supposed to get something like 5 orbital ring roads and 8 arterial motorways, even Whitehall was planned to be demolished to make way for them. Thankfully that sort of large scale town planning fell out of favor (and ran out of money).
One of the huge issues for me.. Someone touched on above..
The short term thinking of elections every 4 years or whatever.. Of course we need elections on a semi regular basis but that encourages MPs just to think in 4 year blocks.. They could be out on thier ass after that...
I think we maybe need a 4th pillar of government for long term projects, such as rail infrastructure, health care, environmental goals etc..
.. Which is sacrosanct.. and the 'government de jour' cannot interfere with it, with out cross party support and strict arbitration via an independent body...
I suppose that idea would add another layer of burocacy... And cost.. But.. I think it might be a net gain for society as a whole.
Does that rise in employer NI not force them to employers to ensure we are all self sacrificing as much as possible, because the employer can then save more than / some of the increase?
I wonder then whether the pension raid comes in 5yrs time if they are re-elected, sucking up the funds of the savers over this period.
As a modest size charity, that is going to sting for my work.
Your competitors are equivalently impacted.
Does your charity supply services that should really be funded directly by the public sector?
mattyfez
Full Member
One of the huge issues for me.. Someone touched on above..The short term thinking of elections every 4 years or whatever.. Of course we need elections on a semi regular basis but that encourages MPs just to think in 4 year blocks.. They could be out on thier ass after that…
I think we maybe need a 4th pillar of government for long term projects, such as rail infrastructure, health care, environmental goals etc..
.. Which is sacrosanct.. and the ‘government de jour’ cannot interfere with it, with out cross party support and strict arbitration via an independent body…
I suppose that idea would add another layer of burocacy… And cost.. But.. I think it might be a net gain for society as a whole.
I can definitely see merit in that. Has it been tried in any other democracy I wonder? Even if it hasn't, there is always a first adopter of course. That said I suspect it would be a policy to implement in more favourable and stable conditions I suppose, possibly not now.
The transport system in the entire north of England is uniquely s*** though.
FTFY
As pointed out, you could use the £2 (well, 170ish not on the motorway) figure with more validity because people actually had to pay that to get to work.
I remember filling up at the Shell garage near Saltaire and it was £1.99. No motorway services highwaymen masks involved
For the 'Biggest Budget in Decades' it'll have little to no impact on me. As a 'Working Person'(c) I guess that was the aim.
IMHO :
Duty on Vape juice (and banning of disposables) - good idea, vaping has long past being a safer alternative to smoking and has become a way for sellers and manufacturers (many of which are Tobacco Cos via shell corps) to hook kids into a newer, more addictive product.
VAT on Private Schools, yeah it's a Labour kick in the nuts to the Poshos, but if you've got to make money somewhere.
Increased Duty on Private Jet flights. Shit even I can see that's a working-class dog whistle. So Rishi will pay £500 more when he jets off to the US with his Billionaire Wife... they're billionaires. It'll raise pocket change relatively, but it's a nice little FU to the out-going PM and Party.
I think they're still having the drains up on the employers NI, but it seems it's somewhere between a win, and a small loss for really small employers, it's the big employers who'll pay the bill.
Anyone seen any sign of the 'unprecedented' active travel funding they were promising after the election?
johnx2
Free Member
NHS sees a£22.6bn increase in the revenue (day-to-day spending ) health budget (RDEL)
£3.1bn increase in the capital budget (CDEL)
(Dept expenditure limits)
It’s a start.
I thought I'd seen a higher figure, I was beginning to doubt my sanity. Lol
Did you hear the baying idiots in the chamber roaring in delight at 1% cut in duty for draught beer. They were genuinely more animated (or wanted to appear more animated) about that than any of the big stuff like Nat Insurance, NHS spending or Non Dom.
Idiots.
I thought I’d seen a higher figure
£350bn on the side of a bus?
Given how much it was mentioned in the run up, I'm a little surprised there's no impact to
Tax rates for high earners
Pensions limits
Any tax-free gimmes
I think the hike in CGT only really impacts people who are gaming the "earn minimum wage and take the rest as profits" approach, which I don't have much problem with. The vast majority of other folks can afford to wrapper any investments they have (a couple get a total of £160k per year in tax free investments, combining pension and ISA), so not much impact there