Britons cutting back on everyday spending due to gloomy outlook on ‘worsening' UK economy
Britons are reducing their spending on everyday items amid falling consumer confidence in the economy ahead of the chancellor 's spring budget, according to a new survey.
Rachel Reeves has ruled out ' tax and spend' policies in her spring statement on Wednesday, however, she is under pressure to increase taxes or cut spending to meet the financial rules she set in October.
The Consumer Pulse survey from KPMG found three in five people think the UK economy is worsening, meaning that even financially secure consumers are cutting back their spending on everyday items.
According to the poll, the number of people who think the economy is degrading grew by 15 per cent in the last three months to 58 per cent.
The survey of 3,000 UK consumers explored their buying behaviour in the three months to February. Those feeling insecure about their finances grew from 21 per cent to 24 per cent from December to February.
More than four in 10 said they are reducing their spend on everyday items and 36 per cent said they are saving more as a contingency. Nearly one in three people surveyed said they were deferring the purchase of big-ticket items.
When she delivers her spring statement on Wednesday, Ms Reeves will be responding to new forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility made after the Bank of England reduced its forecasts for growth this year.
Public sector net borrowing was £10.7 billion in February, £4.2 billion more than had been forecast by the OBR.
Government departments have been asked to go through their spending line by line.
Linda Ellett, Head of Consumer, Retail and Leisure for KPMG UK, said: 'Our research continues to show that while only a minority of consumers feel financially insecure, the majority feel that the economy is heading in the wrong direction.'
'Some may be taking this action as they prepare for higher costs, such as a new mortgage deal or the higher cost of travel,' she added.
'But other cautious consumers are certainly preparing for the potential impact on them from what they believe to be a worsening economy. This week's Spring Statement needs to give people the confidence in the longer-term UK economic outlook.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
What can Rachel Reeves do to pay for Starmer's welfare U-turn?
Taken together, the cost to the public finances of recent reversals on welfare payments is estimated to be around £4.5bn. Restoration of the pensioners ' winter fuel payment for most recipients will cost some £1.2bn, while keeping the present arrangements on personal independence payment and the health element of universal credit will mean the chancellor loses some £2.1bn and £1.1bn, respectively. While these aren't catastrophic changes in a total public spending universe of about £1.3 trillion, Rachel Reeves allowed herself very little fiscal headroom. So she'll be looking to make up for the cost of the recent U-turns. Given that she's only just delivered a spending review that set out plans for the next three years, including tighter budgets for many government departments, she is reportedly more willing to consider tax hikes. The uncertain outlook for economic growth will make her even more cautious. Despite constraints, she has some options… What won't Rachel Reeves do? All the signs are that she won't make any further changes that could be interpreted as a direct contravention of the 2024 general election manifesto promise: 'We will ensure taxes on working people are kept as low as possible. Labour will not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase national insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of income tax, or VAT.' The 2 per cent hike in employers' national insurance at the last Budget hit smaller businesses quite hard, and will affect wage rises, so it was very close to the letter of that pledge. She's not going to go there again. But bear in mind that the freeze on tax thresholds will remain in place until 2028 – a hidden rise in income tax for many. Is anything else ruled out? Lots: there's a whole herd of sacred cattle that she can't touch, politically. These include the rate of corporation tax, about which the manifesto says: ' Labour will cap corporation tax at the current level of 25 per cent, the lowest in the G7, for the entire parliament'. Slapping VAT on zero-rated items is effectively ruled out, as are increases in most other business taxes. There's zero chance of any further capital gains tax being applied to homeowners, which would make eminent economic sense but would be electoral suicide. Reeves may also have run out of scope for squeezing rich non-doms – for fear of ending up with lower tax revenues due to flight and increased avoidance. Council tax procedures are being tweaked, but there is little chance of any thorough reform of the eccentric system of local government finance; memories of the imposition of the poll tax remain raw, almost four decades on. The big picture here is that the UK tax base is artificially narrow, for historical and political reasons. For example, personal taxation in the UK is still low by international standards, even when the overall tax burden is near a post-Second World War high, but UK business rates are correspondingly high and uncompetitive. Wealth is taxed marginally and haphazardly. This is bad for long-term growth, and every year means taxes are loaded too high onto a too-narrow base. What is an easy hit? Capital gains tax, as usual, but again Reeves will need to be careful not to go too far and risk discouraging savings and encouraging avoidance. The same goes for changing the rules on personal pensions: higher-rate tax relief on contributions and reducing the tax-free allowance for a cash withdrawal from a pension pot. Given the need for orderly retirement planning, radical changes would be undesirable and unpopular. But there could be adjustments. Will petrol go up? It certainly should. Unbelievably, fuel duty has been frozen since 2011, at 57.95p per litre, with an additional 5p per litre 'temporary' cut in 2022 to ease the cost of living crisis. Technically, this is due to be ended next year, with the duty now scheduled to rise. For Reeves to raise more than planned she'd have to up it by, say, 10p per litre. It would raise enough to pay for the U-turns, but would attract the scorn of the motorist and 'white van man'. The wider problem here is that the switch to electric vehicles is already depressing fuel duties. Sin taxes? Alcohol and tobacco are mostly maxed out, but there's still some scope with online gambling and duties on sugary and fatty foods. The sugary drinks levy worked very well on health grounds alone, but any 'tax on food' has always been anathema to the British public (albeit VAT is levied on confectionery). Reeves will also be mindful of the great 'pasty tax' fiasco of 2012 when George Osborne tried to make some rational changes to the VAT regime, including on 'ambient' takeaway food. His 'omnishambles' Budget soon collapsed, and Greggs customers have steadily got flabbier in the succeeding years. Rachel will be steering clear. What does the Labour left want? A wealth tax: a 2 per cent levy for those with assets in excess of £10m. No chance. What about a tax on interest the Bank of England pays the banks on deposits? That does crop up as a suggestion. It's very abstruse stuff, but this basically boils down to another tax on the commercial banks. It isn't paid by 'rich bankers' as such (though it might dent some bonuses) but by the banks themselves. Other things being equal, it would mean lower returns for savers, less availability of business finance and mortgages, and a less resilient banking system. The Bank of England says it could make managing monetary policy more difficult. But it could reduce the cost of borrowing to the Treasury by maybe £10bn a year. The chancellor may find the temptation irresistible.
Rhyl Journal
3 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Warnings of tax rises after Downing Street welfare U-turn
The Prime Minister said that the concessions strike 'the right balance', but think tanks have warned that the changes announced in the early hours of Friday morning have made Rachel Reeves's 'already difficult Budget balancing act that much harder'. Downing Street declined to rule out the possibility of increases in the autumn, telling reporters on Friday that 'tax decisions are set out at fiscal events'.The concessions on offer include protecting personal independence payments (Pip) for all existing claimants, while all existing recipients of the health element of Universal Credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said on Friday that the changes make tax rises in the budget expected in the autumn more likely. Associate director Tom Waters 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.' Ruth Curtice, chief executive at the Resolution Foundation, said that 'the concessions aren't cheap, costing as much as £3 billion and more than halving the medium-term savings from the overall set of reforms announced just three months ago'. She added: 'This adds to the already mounting pressure to deliver fresh consolidation in the Budget this Autumn.' The Resolution Foundation noted that extending a freeze in personal tax threshold by one year would save '£4 billion a year'. Asked about how the climbdown would be funded, Downing Street said on Friday that 'There'll be no permanent increase in borrowing, as is standard. 'We'll set out how this will be funded at the budget, alongside a full economic and fiscal forecast in the autumn, in the usual way.' Asked whether they could say there would be no tax rises, a Number 10 spokesman said: 'As ever, as is a long-standing principle, tax decisions are set out at fiscal events.' Some 126 Labour backbenchers had signed an amendment that would have halted the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill in its tracks when it faces its first Commons hurdle on July 1. The list of Labour MPs putting their name to the amendment had been growing throughout the week, as Downing Street said that they would be pressing on with next week's vote. After the late-night U-turn, Sir Keir said that 'the most important thing is that we can make the reform we need'. 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right,' he added. 'For me, getting that package adjusted in that way is the right thing to do, it means it's the right balance, it's common sense that we can now get on with it.' While leading rebels believe the concessions are likely to be enough to win over a majority, some remain opposed to the plans in their current form. Dr Simon Opher, who represents Stroud, said in a statement that he is glad the Government 'are listening', but that the changes 'do not tackle the eligibility issues that are at the heart of many of the problems with Pip'. 'The Bill should be scrapped and we should start again and put the needs of disabled people at the centre of the process,' he said. It is also understood that talks are underway over rebel attempts to lay another amendment to seek to delay the plans, as reported by The Guardian. The fallout also threatens to cause lasting damage, with some backbenchers having called for a reset of relations between Number 10 and the parliamentary party. Speaking to the PA news agency, a number of Labour backbenchers expressed deeper frustration with how Downing Street has handled its backbenchers since last year's election. The Government's original package had restricted eligibility for Pip, the main disability payment in England, as well as cutting the health-related element of universal credit. Existing recipients were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition. Now, the changes to Pip will be implemented in November 2026 and apply to new claimants only, while all existing recipients of the health element of universal credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The concessions on Pip alone protect some 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were set to lose out following reassessment.
Glasgow Times
3 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Warnings of tax rises after Downing Street welfare U-turn
The Prime Minister said that the concessions strike 'the right balance', but think tanks have warned that the changes announced in the early hours of Friday morning have made Rachel Reeves's 'already difficult Budget balancing act that much harder'. Rachel Reeves's Budget is set to be much harder to balance following the U-turn (Owen Humphreys/PA) Downing Street declined to rule out the possibility of increases in the autumn, telling reporters on Friday that 'tax decisions are set out at fiscal events'.The concessions on offer include protecting personal independence payments (Pip) for all existing claimants, while all existing recipients of the health element of Universal Credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said on Friday that the changes make tax rises in the budget expected in the autumn more likely. Associate director Tom Waters 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.' Ruth Curtice, chief executive at the Resolution Foundation, said that 'the concessions aren't cheap, costing as much as £3 billion and more than halving the medium-term savings from the overall set of reforms announced just three months ago'. She added: 'This adds to the already mounting pressure to deliver fresh consolidation in the Budget this Autumn.' The Resolution Foundation noted that extending a freeze in personal tax threshold by one year would save '£4 billion a year'. Asked about how the climbdown would be funded, Downing Street said on Friday that 'There'll be no permanent increase in borrowing, as is standard. 'We'll set out how this will be funded at the budget, alongside a full economic and fiscal forecast in the autumn, in the usual way.' Asked whether they could say there would be no tax rises, a Number 10 spokesman said: 'As ever, as is a long-standing principle, tax decisions are set out at fiscal events.' Some 126 Labour backbenchers had signed an amendment that would have halted the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill in its tracks when it faces its first Commons hurdle on July 1. The list of Labour MPs putting their name to the amendment had been growing throughout the week, as Downing Street said that they would be pressing on with next week's vote. After the late-night U-turn, Sir Keir said that 'the most important thing is that we can make the reform we need'. 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right,' he added. 'For me, getting that package adjusted in that way is the right thing to do, it means it's the right balance, it's common sense that we can now get on with it.' While leading rebels believe the concessions are likely to be enough to win over a majority, some remain opposed to the plans in their current form. Dr Simon Opher, who represents Stroud, said in a statement that he is glad the Government 'are listening', but that the changes 'do not tackle the eligibility issues that are at the heart of many of the problems with Pip'. 'The Bill should be scrapped and we should start again and put the needs of disabled people at the centre of the process,' he said. It is also understood that talks are underway over rebel attempts to lay another amendment to seek to delay the plans, as reported by The Guardian. The fallout also threatens to cause lasting damage, with some backbenchers having called for a reset of relations between Number 10 and the parliamentary party. Speaking to the PA news agency, a number of Labour backbenchers expressed deeper frustration with how Downing Street has handled its backbenchers since last year's election. The Government's original package had restricted eligibility for Pip, the main disability payment in England, as well as cutting the health-related element of universal credit. Existing recipients were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition. Now, the changes to Pip will be implemented in November 2026 and apply to new claimants only, while all existing recipients of the health element of universal credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The concessions on Pip alone protect some 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were set to lose out following reassessment.
