UK borrowing higher than forecast in June as debt interest costs soar
The ONS said interest payable on debt jumped to £16.4 billion due to a large rise in Retail Prices Index (RPI) inflation impacting index-linked government bonds.
June borrowing was higher than the £17.6 billion expected by most economists and the £17.1 billion forecast by Britain's independent economic forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).
Borrowing for the first three months of the financial year to date stood at £57.8 billion, £7.5 billion more than the same three-month period in 2024.
Richard Heys, acting chief economist at the ONS, said: 'The rising costs of providing public services and a large rise this month in the interest payable on index-linked gilts pushed up overall spending more than the increases in income from taxes and national insurance contributions, causing borrowing to rise in June.'
The ONS said so-called compulsory social contributions, largely made up of national insurance contributions (NICs), jumped by £3.1 billion to £17.5 billion last month – the highest ever recorded for June.
In the first three months of the financial year to date, these compulsory social contributions rose to £48 billion, up £7.5 billion year on year and marking another record.
It followed the move by Rachel Reeves in April to increase NICs for employers, which has seen wage costs soar for firms across the UK as they also faced a rise in the minimum wage in the same month.
Public sector net debt, excluding public sector banks, stood at £2.87 trillion at the end of June and was estimated at 96.3% of gross domestic product (GDP), which was 0.5 percentage points higher than a year earlier and remains at levels last seen in the early 1960s.
Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, said: 'We are committed to tough fiscal rules, so we do not borrow for day-to-day spending and get debt down as a share of our economy.'
But the figures will stoke fears the Government will be forced to hike taxes in the autumn budget.
Economist Rob Wood, at Pantheon Macroeconomics, said the Chancellor has a 'major problem' to overcome, 'created by U-turns on previously planned spending cuts and possible downgrades to OBR growth forecasts this autumn'.
He said: 'We estimate that the Chancellor's £9.9 billion of headroom has turned into a £13 billion hole, meaning that Ms Reeves would need to raise taxes or cut spending by a little over £20 billion in the autumn budget to restore her slim margin of headroom.
'We expect 'sin tax' and duty hikes, freezing income tax thresholds for an extra year in 2029 and a pensions tax raid – reinstating the lifetime limit on pension pots and cutting relief – to fill most of the hole.'
Shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride said: 'Rachel Reeves is spending money she doesn't have.
'Debt interest already costs taxpayers £100 billion a year – almost double the defence budget – and it's forecast to rise to £130 billion on Labour's watch.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
26 minutes ago
- Times
‘Fewer nom-doms left than feared' after Rachel Reeves's budget
An exodus of millionaires from Britain after Rachel Reeves's crackdown on non-doms may not be as drastic as feared, it has been claimed. In April, the government abolished the centuries-old non-dom tax regime, which allowed wealthy foreigners living in the UK to shelter their worldwide assets from British taxes for an annual fee starting at £30,000. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government's fiscal watchdog, had said that up to a quarter of non-doms would leave Britain in response to the changes. Knightsbridge in London is a hotspot for non-doms — a UK resident whose permanent home, or domicile, is for tax purposes outside the country DARKO MLINAREVIC/GETTY IMAGES There have been fears of a broader exodus. One survey suggested that Britain lost more millionaires to migration last year than any other country except China. But initial payroll data reported by the Financial Times suggested that the reaction from the wealthy to the tax changes has been in line with, or even below, the OBR's forecast. One Reeves ally told the newspaper: 'We've seen no evidence that there's been a change in the non-dom profile beyond what the OBR forecast.' However, it is thought that HMRC will not have a full understanding of exactly how many have fled the reforms until January 2027, when individuals submit tax returns for the 2025-26 year. An analysis of company filings in June showed that more than 4,400 directors had left over the past year and numbers had jumped in the past few months, according to Companies House records. • A ham-fisted inheritance tax grab on the middle class would end in tears Departures in April were 75 per cent higher than the same month last year. The pace of exits was highest in finance, insurance and property. Figures compiled by New World Wealth, the global analytics firm, and investment migration advisers Henley & Partners, suggested Britain lost a net 10,800 millionaires to migration last year, a 157 per cent increase on 2023. The research said that high net-worth individuals with liquid assets of more than $1 million (£821,500) had left Britain every 45 minutes since the general election was called last year. Labour included the non-dom pledge in their manifesto, arguing that it would pay for 40,000 more NHS appointments each week. The OBR had estimated that the abolition of the non-dom regime would raise £33 billion in extra tax over the next five years, although it admitted that this prediction was 'highly uncertain' because it depended on the decisions of a relatively small number of wealthy people. A softer than expected wealth exodus, alongside higher than expected GDP growth, will ease pressure on the chancellor. However, Reeves is still expected to face a hole of at least £20 billion in the autumn budget that must be filled by a combination of tax rises and spending cuts. Officials are said to be considering changes to capital gains tax and adjusting how much can be given as a gift, and when, to avoid inheritance tax. The Treasury said: 'The UK remains a highly attractive place to live and invest. Our main capital gains tax rate is lower than any other G7 European country and our new residence-based regime is simpler and more attractive than the previous one.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
UK inflation to rise as summer spending pushes up hotels and airfares
UK inflation is set to have edged higher last month as summer spending pushed up flight and hotel costs, and food prices continue to climb. One economist said an ' Oasis bump' could have contributed to higher accommodation prices in July. Consumer Prices Index (CPI) inflation is widely expected to have increased in July, from the 3.6% rate recorded in June, when the Office for National Statistics publishes its latest dataset on Wednesday. Sanjay Raja, senior economist for Deutsche Bank, said he was estimating that price pressures will have pushed CPI to 3.8% last month. 'July inflation will likely see price momentum rise further into uncomfortable territory,' he wrote in a research note. The school summer holidays are likely to have seen airfares, rail costs, and package holiday prices bumped higher. Mr Raja also pointed to a possible spike hotel prices which he said could partly be attributed to British band Oasis kicking off their reunion tour in July. The concerts brought in hoards of fans to arenas in Cardiff, Manchester, London and Edinburgh. Accommodation prices could rise by as much as 9% in July, compared with June, 'with the Oasis concerts having a strong impact on Manchester prices alone', the economist said. Meanwhile, food prices have been rising in recent months – partly driven by higher ingredients, labour, and regulatory costs. Annual food price inflation increased for the third month in a row in June, hitting the highest rate since February 2024. Mr Raja said food inflation is likely to have moved higher in July, but could be 'nearing the peak'. Andrew Goodwin, chief UK economist for Oxford Economics, forecast that CPI inflation will edge up to 3.7% in July. He said that an increase in fuel prices at the pumps could help push monthly inflation higher. The Bank of England is forecasting that inflation will increase further this year and peak at about 4% in September, before easing throughout the next two years. The central bank said accelerating food and energy prices have been key drivers in the uptick in inflation.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Reeves's inheritance tax plans are performative nonsense
It's hard not to feel some pity for Rachel Reeves. Her party and her own promises have boxed her into an impossible position. The idea was that the mere presence of a calm – and broadly sane — Labour Party would mean that 'stability' would return automatically. It turns out that maths and economics don't quite work this way, and she has found herself with a three-pronged conundrum. First, she cannot cut government expenditure at all. Even attempting to marginally trim the rise of our unaffordable welfare state will prove to be unpalatable to her party's backbenchers. Labour's client base of voters tend to hover around the public sector or rely on handouts so, politically, spending will have to go up. Second, the party only got into power because you exuded some vague commitment to economic prudence. It promised to get borrowing down. Break this pledge and the markets will kill them. Third, in the heat of battle Labour conjured up a barely comprehensible piece of campaigning verbiage that it would not raise tax on 'working people'. This proved to be just about adequate to get most of its spokespeople through a three or four minute interview on television or radio during the election campaign, but the Government must not be seen to break this pledge. Given this trifecta of economic nonsense, Ms Reeves faces a serious day-to-day problem. How can she raise some more revenue to make it look that you are even half-serious about balancing the books? The latest wheeze seems to be to tighten up inheritance tax rules. This, we are told, will only affect the rich, will mean that those with the broadest shoulders bear even more of the increasing state expenditure burden and could help to generate a smidge of 'fiscal headroom'. Such a move would be a nightmare on almost every level. Death duties are just about the worst sort of tax you can levy because they have virtually none of the features that a sensible tax should exhibit. They are complex, they are avoidable, and they are difficult to collect. The inescapable truth is that if you are to levy a tax on someone's estate at the moment of their passing, you need to monitor how they dispose of their assets in the time leading up to it. If you can give away your assets on your deathbed just before you take your last breath, the scheme won't work. This is why we have the seven-year rule. Anything you transfer in these seven years before death is considered – at some level – to be part of your estate. Although few of us know the exact time we will meet the Grim Reaper, many can take a guess. As you hit your seventies or eighties, it might be a good time to start divesting your assets to those you wish to receive them. You might not get your timings bang on the money, but you can take a fair guess. You can give away £3,000 a year to any individual without incurring IHT, so start doing so. You can probably shuffle other things in the direction of your descendants too. If you have a box of fancy jewellery that has been handed down over a generation or more, make sure this box finds its way to your children before you die. There's probably no paperwork, so no easy recourse for the HMRC. Finally, if you're super-rich – worth, say, ten million or more – set up a range of elaborate trusts and companies that are intended to financially assist your beneficiaries, but don't advertise this as the obvious motive. Attempting to tighten any of these rules may be politically performative but it won't raise many beans. Currently, IHT accounts for less than 1 per cent of government income. Even if you could get this to 1.1 per cent or 1.2 per cent, which is unlikely, you have not seriously moved the fiscal dial. The idea of the tax authorities attempting to monitor Christmas gifts given by a parent to their child years before the former's death is as unpleasant as it is unrealistic. HMRC can't even operate a functional telephone enquiries system at present. Benjamin Franklin was right when he said the only two certainties in life are death and taxes. But a civilised and sane society should try to keep the two entirely separate.
