Rachel Reeves urged to raise income tax for first time in 50 years
Rachel Reeves should consider raising the basic rate of income tax for the first time in 50 years, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
Paul Johnson suggested the Chancellor follow in the footsteps of Denis Healey, the former Labour chancellor, and take 'drastic action' by increasing the basic rate of income tax, which is currently 20pc, in her autumn Budget.
However, experts warn it would leave workers hundreds of pounds worse off a year.
Writing in The Times on Monday, Mr Johnson said: 'If Reeves does find herself in need of more money come the autumn, perhaps she should take a leaf from the book of her distinguished predecessor both as Labour chancellor and as an MP for the city of Leeds: break the 50-year taboo, be honest and transparent in her choice of tax policy, and raise the basic rate of income tax.'
Tuesday marks exactly 50 years since Mr Healey raised the basic rate from 33pc to 35pc when faced with surging inflation and high unemployment.
In the years since, politicians have moved 'heaven and earth' to avoid raising it, Mr Johnson said.
Income tax is the simplest way for the Treasury to bring in large amounts of revenue. A one percentage point increase in the basic rate would raise £8bn, while a two percentage point increase would generate over £16bn, according to calculations by accountancy firm Blick Rothenberg.
However, the move is deeply politically unpopular because it would leave millions of workers worse off. A worker on £30,000 would see their annual pay fall by £175 if the rate increased to 21pc and £349 if it rose to 22pc. Meanwhile, a worker earning £50,000 would be worse off by £375 or £749 respectively.
As a result, successive Chancellors have only ever reduced the rate since Mr Healey's 1975 Budget. It is currently charged at 20pc on income earned between £12,571 and £50,270.
Experts now predict that Ms Reeves will be forced to either increase taxes or cut spending in the autumn Budget to avoid breaking her self-imposed fiscal rules.
Britain's tax burden is already soaring to a post-war high, with the income tax bill expected to leap from £260bn in 2024-25 to £310bn in 2027-28.
Despite this, some experts think further tax rises are now 'inevitable'.
Nimesh Shah, of Blick Rothenberg, said: 'Given the current state of the country's finances, and global events likely to have fully wiped out the Chancellor's fiscal headroom, it appears inevitable that income tax has to increase at the next autumn Budget.'
However, he said this was more likely to come in the form of a reversal in the Conservative government's National Insurance cuts.
'For me, a more likely 'win' for the Chancellor would be to reverse the Conservative government's National Insurance cut – citing that this measure was always unsustainable for the country's finances.'
Alternatively, the Chancellor could extend the freeze on income tax thresholds.
Rather than increasing the rates, the previous Conservative government chose to freeze income tax thresholds for years – generating billions in extra revenue by stealth as rising wages pushed workers into higher tax bands.
Laura Suter, of stockbroker AJ Bell, said: 'While Labour made an election promise not to raise taxes on working people, they have already done so by the back door by continuing with the income tax band freeze that started under the Tories.'
She added: 'The Chancellor could extend the freeze further into the future if she wanted to continue this boost to taxes – and that's likely to be a more palatable option as it doesn't strictly raise income tax rates and so doesn't break the manifesto promise.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
35 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' Nadia Whittome (James Manning/PA) The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
'Rachel Reeves hopes public gives her credit for listening to winter fuel anger'
Rachel Reeves today tried to turn the page on Labour's biggest mistake so far. Only weeks after the party's landslide election victory, she stunned the country by announcing plans to strip around 10 million pensioners of their winter fuel payments. A Tory aide who served two Chancellors once told me that the winter fuel allowance was at the top of the Treasury hit list offered to No11's new incumbents. Ms Reeves's predecessors didn't fancy picking a fight with pensioners and baulked at being blamed for leaving OAPs struggling to heat their homes. But in the early days in Government, the Chancellor was focused on proving she had an iron grip on the public finances. It was clear from the start that it was a serious error, puncturing the optimism and goodwill from the public who had handed Labour a massive majority. Even senior Government figures acknowledged it had been a mistake but there were fears that they couldn't afford to U-turn - either politically or economically. However it became a running sore for Labour. MPs complained they were being inundated by complaints from constituents and it came up repeatedly on the doorstep in last month's local elections. Unnerved by the surge in support for Reform UK and growing unrest from Labour MPs, Keir Starmer and his Chancellor blinked. Follow our Mirror Politics account on Bluesky here. And follow our Mirror Politics team here - Lizzy Buchan, Mikey Smith, Kevin Maguire, Sophie Huskisson, Dave Burke and Ashley Cowburn. Be first to get the biggest bombshells and breaking news by joining our Politics WhatsApp group here. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you want to leave our community, you can check out any time you like. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Or sign up here to the Mirror's Politics newsletter for all the best exclusives and opinions straight to your inbox. And listen to our exciting new political podcast The Division Bell, hosted by the Mirror and the Express every Thursday. Initially Downing Street suggested we would have to wait until the Budget for the full details, leaving pensioners in the dark about whether they would be eligible. But Ms Reeves gave them hope by confirming an almost complete U-turn, with only the richest OAPs missing out. The Chancellor will take some flak in Westminster for this U-turn. There will be questions over how it's funded and whether the Government is vulnerable to pressure on other unpopular policies. But she'll be hoping that the public gives her credit for listening to their concerns, allowing the Government to draw a line under this sorry episode and shift focus to the positive things it's trying to do.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Labour MPs call for action on benefits after winter fuel U-turn
Labour MPs have broadly welcomed the government's decision to reinstate winter fuel payments for three-quarters of pensioners but some are using the U-turn to renew their calls for planned benefit cuts to be million pensioners in England and Wales with an annual income of £35,000 or less will now be eligible for up to £300 to help with energy bills this MPs thanked the government for listening to their concerns, arguing means testing the payment was fair but that the threshold was set too low last several urged ministers to also think again on planned cuts to disability payments, while others called for the two-child benefit cap to be scrapped. Under planned changes to the benefits system it would be harder for people with less severe conditions to claim personal independence payments (Pips), while the government is promising more support to help people get into the two-child benefit cap policy prevents most families from claiming means-tested benefits for any third or additional children born after April 2017, which critics say has pushed people into are considering lifting the cap, with a decision expected in the autumn, when a child poverty strategy is published. Pressure from Labour backbenchers over the issues - as well as on winter fuel payments - has been growing since the party's poor performance at local election's in May. The winter fuel payment was previously paid to all pensioners but last year the government announced only those receiving pension credit or another means-tested benefit would be eligible in England and Wales. The original cut last year was estimated to save £1.7bn, with the government arguing it was necessary because of the state of the public finances. But the move, which meant more than 10 million pensioners did not receive the payment in 2024, was criticised by charities, unions, opposition parties and many Labour MPs. Following mounting pressure, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced a U-turn last month, with the details of who will get the payment this winter set out on chancellor said she would detail how the £1.25bn policy would be paid for in the autumn Budget. Imran Hussain was among the Labour MPs to call for the planned benefit cuts to be scrapped in response to a government statement in the Commons on changes to winter fuel payments."It is clear the government has listened, so I ask them to listen again to the growing calls in this chamber and scrap their planned, devastating cuts to disability support," the MP for Bradford East said. Fellow Labour MPs Nadia Whittome and Richard Burgon also welcomed the winter fuel U-turn but urged the government to listen to backbench concerns over benefit cuts. In response, Torsten Bell, who is both a Treasury minister and pensions minister, told MPs there needed to be "a better system focusing on supporting those who can work into work". He added that the status quo - where 1,000 people a day are going onto Pips - was not "a position that anybody should support". Labour MP Rachael Maskell, who has been a leading campaigner for restoring winter fuel payments, welcomed the government's change in policy, saying it was "long overdue".She told BBC Radio 4's World at One programme the £35,000 salary threshold for the payment was a "sensible measure". However, Maskell called on the government to consider a larger payment following increases in energy prices over the past MP for York Central also urged a rethink on planned benefit cuts, adding: "You can't rob disabled people in order to pay older people, that doesn't make sense."Meanwhile, she was among several MPs to reiterate their calls for the government to scrap the two-child benefit cap. In the Commons Rebecca Long Bailey, Labour MP for Salford, also asked for reassurances minsters "are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible" to bring children out of poverty. In response Bell said "all levers to reduce child poverty are on the table".The minister added: "She's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this government. "We cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty." The Conservatives have called for the government to apologise to pensioners who lost out on winter fuel payments last year. Shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately described the U-turn as "the most humiliating climbdown a government has ever faced in its first year in office".She told the Commons "this rushed reversal raises as many questions as it answers", arguing the move was "totally unfunded" and could lead to tax rises. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said: "Finally the chancellor has listened to the Liberal Democrats and the tireless campaigners in realising how disastrous this policy was, but the misery it has caused cannot be overstated."Countless pensioners were forced to choose between heating and eating all whilst the government buried its head in the sand for months on end, ignoring those who were really suffering." Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
