
The tax hikes Rachel Reeves could impose to plug the benefits U-turn £3bn hole
Households are on alert for further potential tax hikes in autumn after Keir Starmer handed major concessions to rebels in a bid to salvage flagship legislation on health and disability benefits.
On Friday, the government confirmed a U-turn on its cuts to disability benefits in order to avert a rebellion by more than 120 Labour backbenchers.
The reversal leaves a £3billion hole in Chancellor Rachel Reeves' financial plans, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Meanwhile, the Resolution Foundation warned that tax rises may be needed for her to now meet her fiscal rules.
The initial benefit reforms would have saved the government £5.5billion by the end of the Parliament. The planned cut to personal independence payments eligibility was set to raise the bulk of this saving, £4.5billion.
However, according to the IFS, the revised package of reforms will save only £2.5billion, so will cost the government £3billion relative to their previous plans.
Under the change in tack, people who currently receive personal independence payments (PIP), or the health element of universal credit, will continue to do so. Instead, planned cuts will now only hit future claimants.
Liz Kendall, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, said: 'We have listened to people, we are in a good place now'.
Most economists and think tanks think tax rises in the Autumn Budget 2025 are now inevitable.
Tom Waters, an associate director at IFS, said: 'These changes more than halve the saving of the package of reforms as a whole, making the Chancellor's already difficult Budget balancing act that much harder.
'The decision is to protect existing health-related benefit claimants from the reforms, thereby making the savings entirely from new claimants to these benefits.
'This will create big differences – thousands of pounds a year, for many years in some cases – between similar people with similar health conditions who happen to have applied at a slightly different time.'
Samuel Mather-Holgate, an independent financial adviser at Mather and Murray Financial told Newspage: 'With Starmer doing more U-turns than someone doing the bleep test, taxes are going up.
'There's no way that other departments can mitigate these changes to their budget.'
Which taxes could be increased?
Reeves has ruled out taxes on the working people, including income tax, National Insurance for employees, VAT and corporation tax. Other taxes will be in her sights.
Capital gains tax
Higher capital gains tax could be one option for Reeves.
Capital gains tax is levied on profits from assets ranging from shares to second homes, buy-to-let properties and personal possessions.
The rates for stocks and shares gains were hiked in the 2024 Autumn Budget to 18 per cent for basic rate taxpayers and to 24 per cent for those paying higher rates of tax.
The profits from assets like sharers tend to come from people taking a risk, whether an entrepreneurial one or an investment one, making capital gains tax a likely target for hikes.
Inheritance tax
Reeves could have inheritance tax in her sights again
It is a growing money-spinner for the government, with the number of households falling in scope for it rising.
In the 2024 Autumn Budget, Reeves capped the availability of Business Relief and Agricultural Relief, and halved the relief available on Alternative Investment Market shares.
Reeves also unveiled plans to bring pensions into the scope of inheritance tax from 2027. Further tweaks and amendments could happen.
Pensions
Pensions are a major source of wealth for many people, making them a prime target for Reeves.
Last year, while Reeves dragged unused pension assets into the inheritance tax net from April 2027, she did not go as far as some experts feared.
That is not to say that she will not meddle with pensions later this year.
HMRC recently announced a consultation on salary sacrifice - when people forgo a pay rise or bonus and add to their pension instead, which helps avoid higher marginal tax rates.
It has prompted speculation that Reeves could introduce a cap on the amount of salary sacrifice people can use.
There is also speculation about the reintroduction of the pensions lifetime allowance.
The Chancellor could also look at reforming income tax relief on pension contributions.
Tax thresholds freeze
The freeze on certain tax thresholds since 2021 has created a huge stealth tax raid in recent years.
The frozen basic rate threshold, currently £12,570, drags more people into paying income tax and means that the real value - adjusted for inflation - of the tax-free allowance has been diminished.
Stalling the higher rate threshold at £50,270 has shifted more people and a greater slice of earnings into the 40 per cent bracket.
John Woolfitt, a director at Atlantic Capital Markets, told Newspage: 'A "stealth tax" manoeuvre will be high on the cards.
'Income tax allowance and the higher-rate threshold currently rise with inflation. Freezing or delaying future increases effectively raises income tax, without officially having to announce a hike.'
He added: 'Targeting high earners and wealth transfers could also be seen and a populist move as the government tries to sure up support from the broader electorate.'
According to the Resolution Foundation, extending the freeze in personal tax threshold by one year will save £4billion a year, 'though further consolidation is likely to be needed in the Budget this Autumn.'
Property
Further tax changes linked to buying and selling property could be introduced.
Last year, Reeves introduced a 2 per cent increase to stamp duty for second home owners.
Future stamp duty hikes could target owners of multiple properties or high-value property transactions.
Businesses
Higher employer national insurance contributions are already hammering businesses across Britain.
However, under growing pressure to boost the Treasury's coffers, Reeves could set her signs on corporation taxes, VAT exemptions or other duties.
'This would really impact the already fragile business confidence in the UK', Woolfitt said.
Wealth tax
Some campaigners believe Reeves should impose a wealth tax to boost the tax-take and quash inequality.
Tax Justice UK is calling on more taxes for the super-rich to be introduced by the current Government.
It wants to see a 2 per cent wealth tax on assets over £10million, which it says will raise up to £24 billion a year.
It also wants to apply national insurance to investment income, close inheritance tax and non-dom loopholes, and introduce a 4 per cent tax on share buybacks.
It remains unclear whether a wealth tax is on Reeves' agenda and how it would work in practice.
An unprecedented 16,500 wealthy Britons are predicted to leave this year amid higher taxes and a gloomy economic outlook.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Carrie Johnson taken to hospital with severe dehydration
Carrie Johnson was admitted to hospital with severe dehydration because of the hot weather. The wife of Boris Johnson said she had spent two nights in hospital after a 'brutal' week in which she also suffered from mastitis, a form of breast inflammation. Mrs Johnson gave birth to her fourth child, a girl named Poppy, in May. Writing on Instagram on Friday, she said: 'Being hospitalised for two nights for severe dehydration was not on my postpartum bingo card. 'Breastfeeding mums make sure you eat and drink enough in this heat. Especially if your babe is clusterfeeding.' Temperatures are set to surpass 30C this weekend. Clusterfeeding is when a baby feeds very frequently in a few hours before going without milk for extended periods. Mrs Johnson added: 'This week has honestly been brutal. Mastitis (me), Reflux (her), Dehydration (me). What a pair we are! But thank you for all the kindest messages, especially all the brilliant advice on reflux. Really appreciate it and made me feel way less alone going [through] it all. And as ever, thanks to our amazing NHS.' Mr and Mrs Johnson have three other children together: Wilf, five, Romy, three, and Frank, one. Mrs Johnson is a former communications officer who worked for the Conservative Party from 2009 to 2019. She acted as a media special adviser for Conservative Cabinet ministers including Sajid Javid and John Whittingdale. In 2018, at the age of 29, she was appointed as the Conservative party's head of communications during the government of Theresa May. She left the position a year later. Her relationship with Mr Johnson was announced in 2019 as he was preparing to run for the leadership of the Conservative Party and the country. When Mr Johnson became premier in July of that year, she became the first unmarried partner of a prime minister to reside in Downing Street. While living there, they had Wilfred and Romy. They are thought to have met as early as 2010 when Mrs Johnson, née Symonds, was a press officer working on Mr Johnson's campaign to be reselected as the Conservative candidate for London mayor. The couple now live in South Oxfordshire where they own a Grade II listed 17th-century country house. The house is surrounded by five acres of grounds and has nine bedrooms.


Sky News
26 minutes ago
- Sky News
This week will haunt the prime minister after his most damaging U-turn yet
Why you can trust Sky News It has been a painful week to watch. A U-turn in slow motion, culminating in a midnight climbdown as Number 10 agreed to concede to defiant MPs on Thursday night. The concessions are considerable. They mean, among other compromises, that existing claimants of personal independence payments (PIP) and the health aspect of Universal Credit will be protected from welfare reforms. Some MPs, like Diane Abbott and Nadia Whittome, remain unconvinced, but they were never high on the list of rebels the government expected to persuade. Ministers now hope that with the backing of MPs like Dame Meg Hillier, the chair of the Treasury Select Committee, the bill will pass the Commons. Their problems won't end there, though. Firstly, there is the question of money. The Resolution Foundation estimates the concessions will cost £3bn of the £5bn the chancellor hoped to save from the welfare reforms. The prime minister 's spokesperson says the changes will be fully funded in the budget and there will be no permanent increase in borrowing. They won't comment on any potential tax rises to plug the gap in Rachel Reeves' finances. The bigger cost, though, is the political one. A year ago, when Sir Keir Starmer strode into Downing Street with a thumping majority, few could have imagined how the last few days would play out. More than 120 MPs, nearly a third of the parliamentary Labour party and more than the total number of Tory MPs, publicly prepared to rebel on a flagship policy. How did it come to this? How did the prime minister, and the people around him, not see a rebellion coming when there had been signs MPs weren't happy for weeks? Those are the questions being asked by senior Labour figures behind the scenes. Sir Keir's spokesperson says the prime minister consistently engages with colleagues, and parliamentary engagement takes many forms. But a lack of engagement with backbenchers has led to the prime minister's most damaging U-turn yet, and this week will haunt the prime minister beyond Tuesday's crunch vote.


Times
32 minutes ago
- Times
Islamophobia definition could have chilling effect, says peer
The government's new Islamophobia definition could stop experts warning about Islamist influence in Britain, a former anti-extremism tsar has warned. Lord Walney said that a review being carried out by Angela Rayner's department should drop the term Islamophobia, or risk 'protecting a religion from criticism' rather than protecting individuals. Ministers launched a 'working group' in February aimed at forming an official definition of what is meant by Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hatred within six months. The group was created because incidents of hate crime in England and Wales aimed at Muslims were at an all-time high, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) said. Rayner has been warned that using the term Islamophobia rather than anti-Muslim hate risked efforts to expose malign influence from countries such as Iran being branded as Islamophobia. The Times previously revealed that Iran had developed a 'sophisticated network' across the UK to actively promote propaganda and 'plant seeds of suspicion' against the British government. Walney, a Labour peer who wrote a government review into political violence and disruption, said the government did not need to 'scrap the whole thing' because 'prejudice against Muslims absolutely exists in this country, and we should be alive to it'. He said: 'But by dropping the term Islamophobia you could send a clear message that this is not about protecting a religion from criticism.' Walney said that a previous definition adopted by the Labour Party in the Corbyn years specifically said that referring to Pakistani grooming gangs or 'the idea that there are Islamist organisations in the UK that seek to infiltrate British communities' would have been counted as Islamophobia. The government confirmed that was no longer its position and it made it clear that it would uphold free speech in the terms of reference for the review. But Walney said: 'Where really significant worry remains is that the legal framework, or certainly how it is being interpreted at the moment across the country — when no definition exists — is having a significant chilling effect on freedom of speech.' He also warned that it would be 'toxically damaging for Labour' if the government was seen 'as furthering a process which can be in any way seen to perpetuate or extend that culture' that led to the cover-up of grooming gangs. Rayner's department has been accused by the Conservatives of carrying out the review in secret, because although certain groups would be invited to respond to a consultation on any definition, the public would not be asked to do so. It is also facing a potential legal challenge from the Free Speech Union if the definition is deemed too wide. One group that has been asked to contribute is the National Secular Society, which said any definition would 'not protect Muslims' but would threaten freedom of speech. Stephen Evans, the society's chief executive, said: 'Anti-Muslim bigotry is a genuine issue which threatens the rights and wellbeing of individuals, as well as wider community cohesion. However, attempting to protect Muslims by using an 'Islamophobia' definition is likely to fail, and may even have the opposite effect. 'Such a definition could fuel fears around 'two-tier justice', as well as demands for other 'religionphobia' definitions. It could also hinder free speech around Islam, including the ability to criticise aspects of Islam which may cause harm. 'We believe the government should rethink its approach, and instead tackle anti-Muslim bigotry by promoting and upholding the fundamental human rights we all share as individuals.' The MHCLG said: 'We are absolutely committed to defending freedom of speech and any proposed definition must be compatible with the right to freedom of speech and expression. 'The independent working group has been engaging extensively with a wide range of communities and will provide independent, evidence-based advice to ministers.'