Minimum wage increases for millions as business taxes rise
Millions of workers will receive a pay rise after the statutory minimum rate increased on Tuesday in a move unions believe will help boost economic growth.
However, business groups have cautioned over the potential impact of higher wage bills and a raft of Budget-linked tax increases that have also come into force.
The Government said more than three million workers across the country will benefit after the Chancellor announced the increase in her autumn budget last year.
Rachel Reeves has described the change as a 'significant step' in the Government reaching their manifesto pledge of a 'genuine living wage for working people'.
From Tuesday, the national living wage increased for everyone employed aged 21 and over, giving a pay rise of up to £1,400 over the course of a year, based on a 35-hour working week.
Under the 6.7% rise people will be paid £12.21 an hour, 77p more than the current living wage of £11.44.
Full-time workers can expect to make £26 more a week, and £117 more a month, the Government said.
The national minimum wage – which covers those aged 21 or under – will go up to £10 an hour for 18 to 20-year-olds, a 16.3% rise, and to £7.55 for 16 and 17-year-olds, an 18% increase.
TUC general secretary Paul Nowak told the PA news agency: 'This increase will make a real difference to the lowest paid in this country at a time when one in six are skipping meals to get by.
'Setting out a path to end the outdated and unfair youth rates will give young workers a boost up and down the country.
'More money in working people's pockets means more spend on our high streets – that's good for workers and good for local economies.'
Unison general secretary Christina McAnea said: 'Making work pay is vital to recharge the economy and help hard-pressed families walk a financial tightrope.
'A decent minimum wage rise gives low-paid workers greater spending power, which they can spend on their local high streets.
'That can help boost growth and get the UK back on track.'
Rachel Harrison, GMB national secretary, said: 'A much-needed wage rise for millions of low-paid workers is welcome.
'But in care homes, schools, the NHS, and so many other employers, workers are still not getting the levels of pay they deserve.
'It's time that people doing some of the most important jobs in our society start getting proper recognition – starting with decent pay.'
Campaigners pointed out that the rates were still below the voluntary so-called real living wage of £12.60 an hour and £13.85 in London, which applies to all workers aged 18 and over.
More than 15,000 businesses are accredited to the Living Wage Foundation, which sets the voluntary rates.
The shopworkers union Usdaw announced that its members in Asda Express, Foodservice and Leon will be paid the voluntary rate by October.
Baroness Philippa Stroud, who chairs the Low Pay Commission, said: 'These rates secure a real-terms pay increase for the lowest-paid workers.
'Young workers will also see substantial increases in their pay floor, making up some of the ground lost against the adult rate over time.
'We recognise these increases come at a time when employers are facing increasing pressure and it is vital we monitor and assess how businesses are responding.
'As we build our evidence base for future recommendations to the Government, we will be launching a call for evidence in the coming weeks and holding in-person meetings up and down the country. I encourage all interested parties to get in touch with us.'
Nevertheless, the rise in the minimum wage will result in higher business costs as they also swallow a number of other increases from the Chancellor's October Budget.
This includes an increase in business rates for many high-street firms due to a reduction in current discounts for more than 250,000 retail, hospitality and leisure firms.
These businesses currently receive a 60% discount on their business rates – the property tax on commercial businesses – bills up to a cap of £110,000.
However, this discount has been reduced to 25% from Tuesday.
Supermarkets, food producers and online retailers have also been hit by a new plastic packaging tax.
Retailers will be liable to pay a charge, based on weight, for every item of packaging they use in the products that they sell.
Later this week, the rate of employer NICs (national insurance contributions) will increase from 13.8% to 15%.
At the same time, firms will also pay more because the Government lowered the threshold at which companies would start paying NICs from £9,100 to £5,000.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Turn Cornwall into industrial zone for net zero, Miliband urged
Cornwall should be made into an industrial hub to fuel net zero, government scientists have urged Ed Miliband. Britain's favourite holiday county and the broader South West of England have been deemed an energy 'super-region', meaning its geology is suited to a raft of new energy-based industries. The hot volcanic rocks lying below parts of Cornwall and Devon make them a top prospect for geothermal energy, according to the British Geological Survey (BGS), which advises the Government on the country's earth science. 'Deep geothermal resources alone could provide enough energy to satisfy the UK's heating needs for at least 100 years,' the quango said. The brines found in many of Cornwall's abandoned mines are also rich in lithium, a mineral essential for making batteries. Meanwhile, Dorset offers the potential for energy storage with rocks suitable for creating caverns to store natural gas or hydrogen, according to the quango. There are already separate plans to create such caverns under Portland Harbour, Britain's former biggest naval base. 'South-west England has significant deep geothermal resources offering opportunities for sustainable heat and power generation,' the BGS said. 'The region's sedimentary basins provide potential sites for carbon capture and storage (CCS), energy storage and geothermal projects … the region is well placed to support the UK's decarbonisation plans.' The Eden Project near St Austell already exploits the region's natural advantages, keeping visitors warm using heat extracted from rocks 3.3-miles beneath its surface. However, the idea of expanding such schemes into a major industry in a county valued for its coastlines, landscapes and tourism is likely to face opposition. The South West is one of several areas whose geology the BGS suggests could support the move to net zero. Others include Northern Ireland, central Scotland, northern England and East Anglia. 'These geological super regions contain subsurface formations and conditions that are favourable to multiple different technologies within a relatively small area,' it said. The Scottish Central Belt is also deemed to be a rich source of geothermal energy with warm underground strata easily accessible via the region's many abandoned coal mines. Michelle Bentham, BGS chief scientist for decarbonisation and resource management, said: 'In Europe, geothermal energy is used much more widely. In the UK, we don't use it as widely and it's always been a bit of a Cinderella of clean energy technologies.' The BGS said careful planning for such technologies in these areas could help unlock an estimated £40bn of annual investment and support the Government's target of creating 650,000 jobs through renewable energy by 2030. Ms Bentham added: 'In the North Sea, we could potentially become a hub for carbon storage in Europe for countries that don't have the right geology who are trying to decarbonise.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Insurrection? Rebellion? Overwhelmed? Can Trump legally take control of California's National Guard?
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. President Donald Trump has built his presidency around stretching the bounds of presidential authority, and his response to protests over an immigration crackdown in Los Angeles is no exception. He invoked a rarely used law to federalize the National Guard over the objection of Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom and local officials, who did not want to bring in the military. Trump may have the authority to take over the National Guard, but the move highlights the two-track command structure of National Guard units, which are normally deployed by a state's governor. The law cited by the White House to take control of the National Guard cites three reasons for that extraordinary step to be taken: the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation; there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States 'It sounds like all three to me,' said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, when asked during congressional testimony which reason the White House was citing. Thus, to the White House, protests launched by job site and Home Depot deportation raids are the equivalent of invasion, rebellion and something the US government doesn't feel like it can handle without the military. It's a far cry from Trump's first term, when his Defense Secretary Mark Esper said, 'The option to use active-duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort, and only in the most urgent and dire of situations,' when the administration considered using the military to address widespread protests related to the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in 2020. The law also requires orders to be sent through state governors, but rather than cooperating, Newsom has complained the White House has illegally overstepped its authority and put troops on the street without adequate plans to feed or house them. The National Guard — the modern version of a state militia — has roots that predate the founding of the country. A series of laws beginning in the early 20th century gave the president and the federal government more power to standardize the National Guard, but they are still mostly supposed to be a state force. 'There's a tension,' said former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a CNN political commentator who also served in the Illinois Air National Guard. 'How is the National Guard actually a militia if the president, against the wishes of the governor, can activate that militia against its own state?' Unless Trump ultimately invokes the Insurrection Act, Kinzinger said, the use of the National Guard must be extremely limited to roles such as guarding federal buildings. The Insurrection Act is a rarely invoked law, passed in 1807 and updated during Reconstruction, that dictates the extreme situations in which US troops can be used on American streets. Trump did not cite the Insurrection Act when he federalized California's National Guard. Hegseth said the military — Trump also called up Marines from Twentynine Palms, California — is required to protect ICE agents doing their jobs on the streets of Los Angeles. unknown content item - Mobilizing the military to act in US cities is not unprecedented in US history. President Dwight Eisenhower called up the 101st Airborne Division to protect Black students in Little Rock, Arkansas, during the integration of public schools in 1957. The most recent example of the National Guard being deployed in a state over the authority of its governor was in 1965, during the Civil Rights Movement, when President Lyndon B. Johnson cited the Insurrection Act to deploy the National Guard to protect marchers led by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in Alabama. The most recent example of the Insurrection Act being cited to deploy the National Guard came in the early 1990s, when California Gov. Pete Wilson asked the federal government for help responding to riots after four Los Angeles Police Department officers were acquitted in the horrific beating of Rodney King. Those riots were widespread and deadly, in contrast with the smattering of skirmishes in Los Angeles this week. Each of those instances involved the Insurrection Act, a law passed in 1807. While Trump has called protesters and rioters 'insurrectionists,' he has not technically invoked the Insurrection Act. People can legitimately debate whether the Los Angeles protests warrant federalizing the National Guard, but Trump cited no law in giving Hegseth authority to mobilize regular military to help in the response. Approximately 700 Marines were mobilized. What may be alarming about Trump's order, according to Elizabeth Goitein, an expert on presidential emergency powers at the Brennan Center for Justice, is that he did not specifically mention Los Angeles, which means he could have essentially OK'd the use of the military across the country for protests against ICE actions that have not yet occurred. 'ICE activity is happening across the country, and will likely draw protests in many places,' Goitein wrote in a detailed thread on social media. 'Trump is authorizing military deployment nationwide, regardless of whether protests involve violence *or are even happening yet.*' That means Americans should be prepared for the possibility of more deployments around the country, something that runs against the American tradition of separating military force from police force. Sending troops and Marines to Los Angeles was necessary, according to Rep. Zach Nunn, a Republican congressman from Iowa and a member of his state's National Guard. 'We have a sanctuary city in LA that refuses to stand with federal law enforcement. We have cops who are bleeding in the street,' he told CNN's Kasie Hunt, referencing skirmishes between law enforcement and protesters. Trump said more service members could be on the way. 'We have to make sure there's going to be law and order,' the president told reporters at the White House on Monday. Even if the Marines aren't directly involved in policing or interacting with protesters, their presence challenges what has been normal in the US. 'An army turned inward can quickly become an instrument of tyranny,' Goitein wrote in her thread. 'That's why domestic deployment should be an absolute last resort.' California is suing the federal government for overstepping its authority, and Newsom invited Trump to arrest him, an idea the president embraced when taking questions from reporters at the White House, but which would be unprecedented since the Civil War. After some Trump supporters argued he should have invoked the Insurrection Act to delay certification of the 2020 election, Goitein was among the many scholars who argued that the laws concerning extreme uses of presidential power needed to be updated and clarified. There is one law, the Posse Comitatus Act, that largely bars the use of the military inside the US. But there is also the Insurrection Act, which has not changed much since the 1870s, when it was used by President Ulysses S. Grant in an attempt to smother the early Ku Klux Klan. That's when Congress amended the Insurrection Act to give presidents more authority. But it did not define the term 'insurrection' or lay out how presidential power should be curbed. Grant went as far as to suspend writ of habeas corpus, the legal principle by which people can't be imprisoned without trial or appearance in court. Critics of the Trump administration argue his actions to militarize the situation in Los Angeles are intended as a sort of theater but are making the situation worse. 'We have domestic law enforcement agencies capable of handling these problems on almost every circumstance,' said Kori Schake, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, appearing on CNN on Monday. 'The standard for invoking the Insurrection Act has historically been very high, and it would be an ominous sign for the Trump administration to invoke it in these circumstances,' Schake said.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Daily T: ‘Tax rises are inevitable' – Rachel Reeves's spending review decoded
The Chancellor's much-anticipated spending review is a day away, with extra cash expected for defence, health and education. Are tax rises on the horizon to pay for all this? Camilla is joined by guest presenter Jacob Rees-Mogg, who says Labour doesn't understand business and argues that Keir Starmer could survive sacking Rachel Reeves… The former Tory MP also reacts to the Government's U-turn on the winter fuel payment, supposedly a response to a healthier economy under Labour. But the unemployment and jobs figures seem to say otherwise. Plus, how two very different rows about immigration triggered riots in North Ireland and in LA. Protests turned violent after an alleged sexual assault in Ballymena, while unrest is ongoing in California's biggest city over ICE raids and Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Watch episodes of the Daily T here. You can also listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.