IMF warns UK to keep budget in check or risk market revolt
[BRUSSELS] UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves must stick to her fiscal rules and keep spending under control or risk a market backlash that undermines the government's economic plans, the International Monetary Fund warned.
In its Article IV annual health check of the economy, the world's economic supervisor told Reeves that any additional spending, such as proposals to reverse cuts to winter-fuel subsidies for pensioners or ending the two-child benefit limit, will need to be covered by other savings or tax rises.
The government needs 'to stay the course and deliver the planned deficit reduction over the next five years to stabilise net debt and reduce vulnerability to gilt market pressures,' the fund said.
Global trade uncertainty and market shocks could yet derail the outlook, it added. 'Materialisation of these risks could result in market pressures, put debt on an upward path, and make it harder to meet the fiscal rules, given limited headroom.' The IMF proposed 'additional revenue or expenditure measures as needed if shocks arise.'
Its recommendations come ahead of the June 11 Spending Review, when Reeves will set budget limits for government departments for the next three years. She fixed the envelope in March but left just £9.9 billion (S$17.2 billion) of headroom against her main fiscal rule that taxes must cover day-to-day spending by the end of the parliament, one of the smallest margins on record.
Reeves has already experienced the reaction of gilt markets to any hint of fiscal laxity at a time when the national debt is close to 100 per cent of gross domestic product. Her big-borrowing budget in October drove up debt costs, more than wiping out her fiscal buffer as yields on long-end debt soared to a 27-year high. Reeves was forced to slash spending in the March Spring Statement to repair the damage.
Pressure on the public purse has mounted in recent days. The government has promised to unwind the cut to winter fuel payments, which would cost up to £1.8 billion, and is considering raising the two-child cap on benefits, potentially costing another £2.5 billion amid growing calls from within the ruling Labour Party to relax its self-imposed budget limits. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is not ruling out any policy to ease child poverty, his spokesman Dave Pares told reporters on Tuesday, but insisted the government views the fiscal rules as vital and non-negotiable.
'One of the elements why there is intense focus on headroom is because headroom is not very high,' said Luc Eyraud, the IMF's UK mission chief. 'To reduce the reactivity of short-term policy to the concept of headroom, the first solution should be to have higher headroom.' BLOOMBERG
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
6 hours ago
- CNA
UK threatens to sue Abramovich to release frozen money from Chelsea sale
LONDON :The British government has said it is fully prepared to take Russian businessman Roman Abramovich to court to help release frozen funds from his sale of Chelsea soccer club that were intended to help victims of Russia's war in Ukraine. Britain sanctioned Abramovich in a crackdown on Russian oligarchs after Moscow's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, triggering a rushed 2.5 billion pound ($3.4 billion) sale of the club on condition that the money would be used to create a humanitarian charity. The money has been frozen in a British bank account because of a disagreement between Abramovich and the government over how the money should be spent, according to people with knowledge of the matter. They said Britain wants the funds spent only in Ukraine in line with a wider European push for Moscow to foot the bill for the deaths and destruction caused by its full-scale invasion but Abramovich wants the money to go to all victims of the war. British finance minister Rachel Reeves and foreign minister David Lammy said in a joint statement the government was ready to take Abramovich to court. "We are deeply frustrated that it has not been possible to reach agreement on this with Mr Abramovich so far," they said. "While the door for negotiations will remain open, we are fully prepared to pursue this through the courts if required, to ensure people suffering in Ukraine can benefit from these proceeds as soon as possible." New York-based law firm Kobre & Kim, which represents Abramovich, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Reuters reported in March that Britain was considering legal action over the issue. George Foulkes, a member of parliament's upper house who has campaigned for ways to release the money, said the government may look at ways to use other frozen Russian assets to help victims if a legal route cannot be found to resolve the disagreement. "It is symbolic, and I think if we can do this it would set a precedent, and we could look at all the other money tied up in property, banks and overseas territories," he told Reuters. Chelsea was sold to a consortium led by U.S. investor Todd Boehly and private equity firm Clearlake Capital in May 2022. The sale hinged on Abramovich not benefiting from it. ($1 = 0.7398 pounds)
CNA
8 hours ago
- CNA
UK threatens to sue Abramovich over use of money from Chelsea sale
LONDON :Britain has threatened to take Russian businessman Roman Abramovich to court over the frozen 2.5 billion pounds ($3.4 billion) in proceeds from his sale of Chelsea soccer club that he wanted to go to victims of Russia's war in Ukraine. Britain sanctioned Abramovich in a crackdown on Russian oligarchs after Moscow's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, triggering a rushed sale of the Premier League club and freezing of the proceeds. Britain wants the funds spent only in Ukraine in line with a wider European push for Moscow to foot the bill for the deaths and destruction triggered by its invasion. Abramovich is seeking more flexibility and wants the money to go to all victims. In a rare joint statement, British finance minister Rachel Reeves and foreign minister David Lammy said on Tuesday the government was ready to step up efforts to secure the money. "The government is determined to see the proceeds from the sale of Chelsea Football Club reach humanitarian causes in Ukraine, following Russia's illegal full-scale invasion. We are deeply frustrated that it has not been possible to reach agreement on this with Mr Abramovich so far," they said. They said the door for negotiations would remain open but that they were "fully prepared to pursue this through the courts if required". A lawyer for Abramovich in Britain did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Reuters reported in March that Britain was considering legal action over the issue. Under Abramovich, Chelsea enjoyed the most successful run in its history before the club was sold to a consortium led by U.S. investor Todd Boehly and private equity firm Clearlake Capital in May 2022. Proceeds from the sale are frozen in a British bank account. They cannot be moved or used without a license from the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation, the agency in the finance ministry that enforces sanctions. ($1 = 0.7398 pounds)
Business Times
17 hours ago
- Business Times
UK economic team looks beyond Europe
THIS week marks the 50th anniversary of the United Kingdom's June 1975 referendum of its membership of the European Common Market, the precursor of the European Union (EU). Yet, some five decades later, the trade policy of the UK is increasingly looking beyond Europe, post-Brexit. In the last few weeks alone, the UK government has agreed a new trade deal with India, plus also a tariff agreement with the United States. UK ministers, including Chancellor Rachel Reeves, have said that this further deal could be finalised swiftly in the form of a new trade agreement with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) comprising Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait. While the GCC economy is, collectively, not nearly as large as that of the United States or even India, the deal would be a significant prize with the Middle Eastern bloc's total GDP of around US$2 trillion in 2022. According to the World Bank, if the GCC continues to grow at a business-as-usual rate, combined GDP would grow to about US$6 trillion by 2050. A second reason why the UK government would celebrate a deal is that the GCC has signed relatively few such agreements to date, including a pact with South Korea. A further big prize for London of a GCC deal could be further, open access to investment from Gulf sovereign wealth funds which tend to be cross-sector investors who often take a long-term multi-decade economic perspective. Total UK-GCC bilateral trade is currently worth around £60 billion (S$104.5 billion). This makes the GCC bloc as a whole equivalent to the UK's fourth largest non-EU export market behind the US, China and Switzerland. A UK deal with the GCC is forecast to add as much as £1.6 billion to this existing bilateral trade in the short term. The UK government hopes that the value will rise by an additional £8.6 billion a year by 2035. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Wider developments It is possible that wider developments could reinforce this dynamic of closer UK-GCC economic cooperation. This includes potential steps toward implementation of a proposed India-Middle East-Europe Corridor to foster connectivity and integration with Asia via a proposed route from India and into Europe. The corridor – which would comprise vast road, railroad and shipping networks – was given new impetus in September 2023 at the G20 summit in New Delhi. A memorandum of understanding was signed to try to develop the project by the governments of India, United States, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and several key European nations. The potentially imminent new UK-GCC deal underlines, yet again, the emphasis London is putting on consolidating ties with key non-European Union nations, post-Brexit. One of the key ideas of some leavers in the 2016 EU referendum was rediscovering the UK's heritage as a formerly strongly-focused global trading nation. This includes former parts of the British Empire and now-Commonwealth, such as India and Singapore; plus other key emerging markets like the GCC states; and key industrialised countries such as Australia, Canada and the US. However, ambitious as much of this agenda is, some of it is a long way from being fully realised. Perhaps the best example is the apparently remote possibility of any UK trade deal with either of the two world's biggest economies: China and the US. For instance, while there has been much fanfare over a potential new UK-US trade deal, any such agreement looks unlikely. This even under the pro-Brexit Trump administration in the period to early-2029. Multiple challenges Equally, while London and Beijing have both been impacted by the disruptive diplomacy of the Trump administration, there are multiple political and economic challenges that appear likely to prevent any deal in the short to medium term. Certainly, a UK-China accord is not one of the deals closest to the finish line compared to potential others like South Korea, Switzerland, Canada, and Mexico, a number of which may potentially be concluded during the current UK parliament ending probably in 2028 or 2029. There are also human rights concerns about some of the agreements, including the GCC and India ones. The UK Trade Union Council has recently slammed such economic agreements with 'countries that abuse human rights and workers' rights, and violate international law'. It also welcomes the recent UK's decision to suspend trade talks with Israel because of the accelerated military offensive in Gaza and the country's decision to limit the amount of aid allowed into the Palestinian territory. A wider critique of the UK's post-Brexit trade deal strategy came last month in a report from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. It argues that the UK government's hyper focus on traditional broad-based trade agreements is misaligned with the country's service-based economy. The think tank, which is chaired by former UK prime minister Blair, asserts that time-consuming, goods-focused trade agreements offer diminishing returns on investment and are poorly matched to the UK's core strengths in services and digital trade. So, rather than doubling down on such slow-moving, broad trade pacts, it advocates instead a movement towards more targeted services-orientated, market access deals that can be negotiated faster and deliver bigger economic impact. The Blair Institute report highlights that, between 2020 and 2024, London inked only three new trade agreements, which are expected to boost exports by a comparatively small £9.5 billion in the long run. In contrast, over the same period, successive UK administrations resolved some 640 market access barriers, whose strategic bilateral market gains increasingly have the potential to deliver higher value, faster. One example cited as good practice is the UK's digital economic agreement with Singapore. This was negotiated relatively quickly in 2022, and leverages UK strengths as a tech and services leader. With the GCC agreement almost finalised, the Blair Institute recommendations are unlikely to significantly influence the end game of that negotiation. However, there could be scope for bringing the insights into wider negotiations with countries including South Korea, Switzerland, South Korea, Canada, and Mexico. This may require the UK Department for Business and Trade to reallocate resources and focus efforts on areas with the greatest potential return with a clearer strategic framework for driving new deals. Taken overall, Brexit is therefore offering new opportunities for the UK to reinvent its world role, especially in the context of trade relations. However, despite the flurry of recent deals, it will probably not be clear for some time exactly how successful this ambitious agenda proves to be, not least given the services orientation of the UK economy. The writer is an associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics
