UK pay deals hold at 3% as employers eye next budget, Brightmine says
The figures represented the eighth monthly Brightmine report in a row to show the median private-sector pay deal was 3%. In the three months to July last year, settlements were 4%.
Sheila Attwood, Brightmine's HR insights and data lead, said employers were unlikely to take much comfort from official data last week showing Britain's economy grew by a stronger-than-expected 0.3% in the second quarter.
"Many employers are continuing to approach wage decisions with caution, keeping wage rises at 3%, in the face of continued economic uncertainty and the looming autumn budget," she said.
Numerous businesses have said they are being squeezed by April's tax increase. Finance minister Rachel Reeves is now back under pressure to plug an expected shortfall in the public finances later this year.
The Bank of England is watching pay growth closely as it tries to work out when and whether to cut interest rates again. It reduced borrowing costs earlier this month but suggested it might move more slowly going forward due to inflation pressures.
Brightmine used data from 19 pay settlements in the three months to July 31 covering more than 600,000 employees.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Welsh Rugby Union defends plans to halve number of professional men's teams
The Welsh Rugby Union has recognised the 'hurt and anger' caused by their proposal to reduce the number of professional men's sides in Wales from four to two, but insisted maintaining the status quo is not the 'right thing' to do. Welsh rugby's governing body has produced a radical plan to turn around the the game at both club and international level, outlining its ambitions in a 90-page consultation document entitled 'The Future of Elite Rugby in Wales'. There will be a six-week consultation period before the WRU makes a final decision on the plans, and WRU chief executive Abi Tierney has urged people to 'improve on the proposals' and provide 'something fit for purpose for Welsh rugby'. The WRU's proposal to halve its number of four men's professional sides – Cardiff, Dragons, Ospreys and Scarlets – to two will be the biggest talking point in a document which outlined four potential models for the game in Wales. It remains unclear whether the two future sides being proposed will be new entities or existing teams, but the two organisations will each have a men's and women's team. Tierney said: 'This is a momentous day for Welsh rugby. No decisions have been made, but we feel based on the analysis this is the strongest (option) yet. 'I know how emotional rugby is in Wales and people will be hurting today, when they think what it could mean potentially for them and their their team. 'I recognise the hurt and anger people are going to be feeling. Change is hard and this is hard for fans. 'But fans' numbers drop has also not been a great experience for anybody, and we want to create an experience they can be proud of. 'What we were doing and keeping doing for fans was not the right thing. I would encourage everybody to imagine how exciting it could be and take that step into the future.' The WRU proposal comes amid Ospreys plans to move into a redeveloped stadium at St Helen's in Swansea for the 2026-27 season and the Scarlets having recently unveiled new investors. Dragons said this week elite professional rugby must continue in Gwent, while Cardiff are currently owned by the WRU having gone into administration in April. It is possible the WRU will face legal action from regions that could essentially be put out of business, with WRU chairman Richard Collier-Keywood saying 'two or three areas of potential legal challenge' exist. The WRU has also proposed the creation of a national campus at a site yet to be decided, which would be the home of the men's and women's professional teams, as well as Wales' national sides and the union's academy. Players were briefed on the WRU's plan on Tuesday and Dave Reddin, the new director of rugby and elite performance, is confident suggestions of possible player strike action will not materialise. Reddin said: 'The national campus would be a radical departure and doing something different, a defensive moat for Welsh rugby and creating a competitive advantage. 'We've got to look outside the box if we want to try and do things differently. 'Be brave enough to to lead sometimes and do things that no one else is doing. Do things things that people think are a bit nutty, too different or too uncomfortable.'
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
How could Labour shake up the property tax system in the Budget?
Radical new ways to tax property are reportedly being considered by the Treasury ahead of the next autumn budget as chancellor Rachel Reeves looks to bolster public finances. Plans to overhaul stamp duty and council tax, as well as a 'mansion tax' to cover the sale of high-value homes, are all on the table, sources have said in recent days. Ms Reeves is understood to have asked officials to calculate how these new 'proportional' taxes would work in the UK, all of which would aim to target wealth more directly. The overhaul would see a national property tax replace stamp duty on owner-occupied homes. Council tax could also be replaced with a local property tax, helping to boost ailing local authority finances. Another speculated plan would see capital gains tax payable by the seller on high-value properties. Under current rules, everyone is exempt from the levy when selling their primary residence. Here's how the plans would change the UK tax landscape. How would the 'mansion tax' work? In the UK, capital gains tax is payable on the sale of most high-value assets. This includes property, stocks and possessions worth over £6,000. Under current rules, a homeowner does not generally need to pay capital gains tax on the sale of a property which has been their primary residence during the time they have owned it. This would change under the proposed plans when the value of the property of the house being sold is worth £1.5 million or more, although this threshold is said to be under consideration. The way capital gains tax works for property sales sees sellers required to work out the 'gain' they have made on the asset. This is usually the difference between what they paid for the property and the amount they sold it for. If this is above, or takes the seller above, their capital gains tax allowance – £3,000 every year – they will need to report and pay the tax. For higher or additional rate income tax payers, the rate is 24 per cent. For those on the basic rate, it's 18 per cent. Several property experts have reacted negatively to the idea. Colleen Babcock, Rightmove's property expert, said: "In essence, this would predominantly be a tax on the most expensive areas of London and the South East. 'The London market is already feeling the effects of taxation more acutely than other parts of England, and this is likely to deter some moves at the upper end.' Meanwhile, Laith Khalaf, head of investment analysis at AJ Bell, said: 'A mansion tax set at a high level would naturally cause people to worry it was just the thin end of the wedge, and the next time the government needs a bit of money they could just lower the threshold.' What is stamp duty and how could it change? Under current rules, stamp duty is a levy paid by the buyer of residential property, varying based on the price of the property and whether it is their first purchase. The amount owed is slightly different depending on who is buying, as first-time buyers are given stamp duty relief and benefit from lower rates. In 2023/24, the levy brought in £11.6 billion for the government. The plans to replace the tax have reportedly drawn on the findings of a report from centre-right think tank Onward, published in August last year. Their recommended policy would see a new tax introduced on the sale of a property when it is worth above £500,000. This levy would be proportionate to the property's value, and paid at a rate set by HMRC. It would be payable by the new owner of the property, only on the amount above £500,000. This would mean the owners of a property worth just over the threshold would pay a 'trivial' amount, according to the report. Could council tax be replaced? Another mulled concept would see council tax replaced with a new local property tax, complementing the 'national' property tax. It will be a tax on property value paid by the owner, the Onward report explains, and at a rate set by each local authority. This should be levied on values up to a cap of £500,000 in a bid to ensure that the richest areas are not able to set far lower rates than those with less valuable properties. This would address a key criticism of the council tax system - that how properties are valued is unfair and inaccurate. The 'band' of council tax that all properties pay is based on values last evaluated in the 1990s, which have become drastically outdated in many places. The local property tax concept would instead see tax liable on properties based on their value at the last point they were sold, meaning valuation would be regularly updated. However, both of the proposed taxes have been criticised as a tax that will disproportionately hit people living in areas where property prices are higher. The effect would be particularly acute in London, said chair of Martyn Gerrard Estate Agents Simon Gerrard, who told The Independent that it would amount to a 'London tax'. He said: 'Rightmove's latest figures for August show that the average price of a property in London is now £666,983. Upping taxes for properties over £500K is not making the wealthy pay their fair share, it's a tax on ordinary Londoners.'
Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
National Trust among charities warning Keir Starmer they face being 'crippled' by new consumer rights rules
The National Trust is among a number of charities warning Sir Keir Starmer they face being 'crippled' by new consumer rights rules. They have expressed fears that recent legislation has created a 'loophole' allowing abuse of their membership schemes. In a letter to the Prime Minister, the charities outlined how provisions under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act might see them lose out on critical funding. Under the legislation, Britons are entitled to cancel a subscription contract during a two–week 'cooling–off' period. The Act is intended to crackdown on 'subscription traps' where consumers are misled into signing up for a subscription through a 'free trial' or reduced price offer. But the National Trust and other charities said this threatens their business models, which sees them earn millions of pounds each year through membership schemes. They warned the new rules allow people to sign up as members and enjoy benefits, such as free entry to museums and sites, for a 14–day period before claiming refunds. For example, a family of two adults and two children could visit Waddesdon Manor and Cliveden, an hour's drive away from each other in Buckinghamshire, before resigning their National Trust membership and recouping the fee. This would normally cost the family £133.50 for the two visits, while an annual National Trust family membership costs £168.60. The signatories of the letter to Sir Keir, seen by The Times, were led by Hilary McGrady, the National Trust's director–general. It was also signed by heads of the Tate, Historic Royal Palaces, Victoria & Albert Museum, the Royal Horticultural Society, the Royal British Legion and Wildlife Trusts. In their warning about the impact of the Act, they wrote: 'Not only has it put at risk our ability to claim gift aid on memberships, but it creates onerous new burdens. 'The proposed cooling–off period would create a loophole that could allow people to join charities as members and enjoy benefits, such as free entry to sites, for a two–week period before claiming substantial refunds for the rest of the year. 'This threatens to cripple the very future value of membership itself as a functional model of income generation for charities with visitor models – currently worth hundreds of millions [of pounds] to charities across the UK every year.' The Act was introduced by the previous Conservative government and the rules are being put in place by Labour next year. The Department for Business and Trade outlined in November how 'subscription traps' are instances where consumers are frequently misled into signing up for a subscription through a 'free trial' or reduced price offer'. 'In some cases if the consumer doesn't cancel the trial within a set amount of time, they are often automatically transferred to a costly subscription payment plan,' it added. 'Subscriptions can be for anything from magazines to beauty boxes, with many subscriptions having complicated or inconvenient cancellation processes such as phone lines with long waits and restrictive opening hours that can leave consumers feeling trapped.' A National Trust spokesperson said: 'Up to now membership has been treated as a charitable donation by law and this is part of a long–held recognition that UK charities are fundamentally different from commercial businesses. 'Charities are currently facing sustained financial pressures, due to the difficult economic climate. 'This legislation would add to that cost burden and see more charities having to reduce their vital services. 'Just last month, the Government made a firm commitment through the Civil Society Covenant to support our sector: closing this loophole would be a clear demonstration of that commitment.' A Government spokesman said: 'Our plans to protect consumers from rip–off subscriptions will not unfairly affect charities, and we continue to engage closely with them to understand their concerns.'
