Middle-class parents £17k poorer than five years ago
Surging nursery fees and stealth taxes have left middle-class parents £17,000 worse off compared to five years ago, figures show.
Data from the Office for National Statistics show that high-earning parents have seen their disposable income fall by nearly a fifth since 2020.
The highest-earning 20pc of parents had £74,129 left after tax in 2023-24 – down from £91,265 in 2019-20.
The sharp 18.8pc drop means they have seen their incomes fall much faster than parents on middle or low earnings.
High-earning married couples with no children fare better but also have felt the pain of higher taxes, with average disposable incomes of £104,606, down by £4,765 in five years.
It comes after workers face significant tax rises by stealth, with the Government having frozen income tax bands since 2022 rather than raising them with inflation.
Tom Waters, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said: 'We've had a reasonable amount of fiscal drag in the form of tax thresholds being frozen, whilst inflation and nominal earnings growth have been very strong.
'That increases the tax liability for higher income people in particular. That is an important factor.'
Jeremy Hunt, the former chancellor, also slashed the additional rate threshold for when people start paying income tax of 45pc to £125,140 from £150,000 in April 2023.
The figures published by the ONS suggest that top-earning parents have the lowest disposable income in 20 years once accounting for inflation. The last time their income after tax was lower was in 2003-04, at £73,765 in today's money.
This figure is before factoring in childcare costs, with British parents paying some of the highest nursery fees of any rich country and little support being available to high earners.
Parents who earn over £100,000 lose access to thousands of pounds in government support such as free nursery hours and tax credits.
IFS analysis has previously shown that a parent in London with two children in nursery would need to earn more than £149,000 to actually be better off if a pay rise put them over the £100,000 threshold.
It comes as nursery fees have surged over the past decade, rising much faster than inflation.
The latest figures from Coram, the children's charity, show the cost of a part-time nursery place for under-twos rose by 7.7pc in 2024 from the previous year.
The combination of surging taxes and some of the world's highest childcare costs has left many of Britain's high-earning parents feeling increasingly hard done by.
Mr Waters said it is difficult to see the logic of the limit for childcare support, which has not been raised to account for inflation since its inception in 2017.
He said: 'The childcare £100,000 threshold is pretty difficult to justify. There is no reason why someone with an income of £99,999 should be treated to the tune of thousands of pounds a year differently to someone who's on £100,000.'
It comes as the number of people earning more than £100,000 a year is set to rise from 1.8m to 2.2m by the end of this parliament, according to the IFS.
However, more tax rises could be coming down the tracks for high-earners who already feel squeezed.
Rachel Reeves is widely expected to raise taxes in autumn if she falls short of her fiscal rules, with only a razor-thin £9.9bn margin of error if the economy deteriorates.
There were rumours Ms Reeves had planned to extend the freeze on income tax thresholds beyond 2028 at her maiden Budget in October last year, but that she stopped short of it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
33 minutes ago
- Times
Fact check: how accurate are Rachel Reeves's spending figures?
'The chancellor's speech was full of numbers, few of them useful,' said Paul Johnson, the head of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Reeves's speech was political to the core — and that extended to her use of statistics. The chancellor appears to have used whichever numbers best suited her position, predominantly to inflate the scale of the government's spending plans. She used bigger, cumulative figures to highlight the scale of investments, rather than annual numbers, and cash increases stripped of their context. She also used Tory spending plans from before the election, which never came to pass, as the baseline for the biggest numbers in her speech. When it did not suit her she ignored the Tory spending plans. While none of the figures are technically inaccurate, economists argue that they are a statistical sleight of hand and that Reeves would be better off being consistent in her use of numbers. Spending going up The claim: The first number in Reeves's speech — bar her obligatory reference to the £22 billion 'black hole' she claims to have been left by the Tories — was the boast that 'in this spending review, total departmental budgets will grow by 2.3 per cent per year in real terms'. The reality: This figure includes spending announced at the budget last year, where there were some of the biggest increases. Over the next three years, total spending — combining day-to-day and investment — will increase by 1.5 per cent. Day-to-day spending will rise by 1.2 per cent a year for the rest of the parliament, about half the rate it rose this year. • More for public services The claim: Reeves promised to add '£190 billion more to the day-to-day running of our public services' as well as an extra £113 billion to public investment. The reality: This is a comparison with previous Conservative plans — dismissed as 'essentially fictitious' by Johnson — drawn up before the election to set a trap for Labour and allow Rishi Sunak to promise tax cuts. The Tory plans envisioned day-to-day spending rising by only about 1 per cent a year, and big cuts in capital spending. Reeves reversed these by changing her fiscal rules to allow more borrowing and is increasing infrastructure spending. But on an annual basis, capital spending will be £151.9 billion in 2029-30, £20.6 billion more in cash terms than it is now. Day-to-day spending will rise by £50.7 billion by 2028-29. More for schools The claim: Reeves said she was providing a 'cash uplift' of more than £4.5 billion for schools by the end of the spending review period. The reality: Context is everything. The Treasury concedes in the small print that the core budget for schools will rise by 0.4 per cent over the next three years. It says that when the cost of expanding free school meals is stripped out of the figures 'you get a real-terms freeze in the budget'. • Rachel Reeves is testing voters' patience … she needs results Backing innovation The claim: Reeves declared that the government was 'backing [Britain's] innovators, researchers and entrepreneurs' with research and development funding rising to a 'record high of £22 billion per year by the end of the spending review'. In a press release the government said that spending on research and development was £86 billion. The reality: Despite the rhetoric, this spending pledge represents a significant scaling back of the government's investment ambitions in research and development. The previous government pledged to hit the £22 billion target by this year and then delayed it until 2027. This target has now been put back even further to 2029. Indeed, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology's budget will barely rise at all next year — far from the rhetoric of Reeves's statement. The £86 billion referred to in government press releases is a cumulative figure. More for social housing The claim: Reeves boasted of 'the biggest cash injection into social and affordable housing in 50 years', saying this would total £39 billion over ten years. The reality: The figure would represent almost a doubling of the £2.3 billion affordable homes programme. However, this spending ramps up slowly, reaching just £4 billion a year by the end of the parliament, leaving it to future chancellors to find ways of maintaining the spending. The overall capital budget for the housing ministry is actually flat over the spending review, with ministers relying on savings elsewhere — especially a reduction in the capital costs to councils of homes for asylum seekers. If these savings fail to materialise, painful decisions will be needed. NHS spending The claim: With health the big winner, Reeves boasted of 'an extra £29 billion per year for the day-to-day running of the health service' along with a 50 per cent boost in the NHS technology budget. The reality: The £29 billion figure is for NHS England specifically, and its budget will rise by 3 per cent a year in real terms, within a 2.8 per cent per year overall Department of Health rise. Capital budgets were increased last year but will be held flat for the rest of this parliament. Increasing technology spending further will therefore come at the cost of crumbling buildings or modern scanners and other kit. NHS leaders are already saying they will find it harder to shift to more modern, efficient treatments without extra equipment and buildings. Efficiency savings The claim: Reeves said the government had carried out a zero-based review of all government spending that would make public services 'more efficient and more productive' and, according to the Treasury, save £13 billion a year by 2029. The reality: These savings are, to put it charitably, extremely hypothetical and in some cases seem wildly optimistic. The NHS, the government thinks, will save nearly £9 billion from higher productivity — despite the fact that the health service has got less rather than more productive since Covid. And the culture department thinks it will save £9 million from 'digital reform' — despite the fact that the MoD, which is a much larger organisation, only thinks it can save £11 million. Overall the savings appear, at best, to be highly aspirational. But if they are not met, it will have a real-world impact on the amount of money the government has for public services.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Fact check: 2025 spending review claims
We've taken a look at some of the key claims. How much is spending increasing by? At the start of her speech Ms Reeves announced that 'total departmental budgets will grow by 2.3% a year in real terms'. That headline figure doesn't tell the full story, however. Firstly, 2.3% is the average annual real-terms growth in total departmental budgets between 2023/24 and 2028/29. That means it includes spending changes that have already been implemented, for both the current (2025/26) and previous (2024/25) financial years. The average annual increase between this year and 2028/29 is 1.5%. Therefore, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said, 'most departments will have larger real-terms budgets at the end of the Parliament than the beginning, but in many cases much of that extra cash will have arrived by April'. Secondly, it's worth noting that the 2.3% figure includes both day-to-day (Resource DEL) and investment (Capital DEL) spending. Capital spending (which funds things like infrastructure projects) is increasing by 3.6% a year on average in real terms between 2023/24 and 2029/30, and by 1.8% between 2025/26 and 2029/30. Day-to-day departmental budgets meanwhile are seeing a smaller average annual real-terms increase – of 1.7% between 2023/24 and 2028/29 and 1.2% between 2025/26 and 2028/29. Which departments are the winners and losers? Ms Reeves touted substantial spending increases in some areas (for example, the 3% rise in day-to-day NHS spending in England), but unsurprisingly her statement did not focus on areas where spending will decrease. Changes to Government spending are not uniform across all departments, and alongside increases in spending on things like the NHS, defence and the justice system, a number of Government departments will see their budgets decrease in real terms. Departments facing real-terms reductions in overall and day-to-day spending include the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (this factors in reductions in aid spending announced earlier this year to offset increased defence spending), the Home Office (although the Government says the Home Office's budget grows in real terms if a planned reduction in asylum spending is excluded) and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Did the Conservatives leave a '£22 billion black hole'? Ms Reeves made a claim we've heard a number of times since it first surfaced in July 2024 – that the previous Conservative government left a '£22 billion black hole in the public finances'. That figure comes from a Treasury audit that forecast a £22 billion overspend in departmental day-to-day spending in 2024/25, but the extent to which it was unexpected or inherited is disputed. The IFS said last year that some of the pressures the Government claimed contributed to this so-called 'black hole' could have been anticipated, but others did 'indeed seem to be greater than could be discerned from the outside'. An Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) review of its March 2024 forecast found an estimated £9.5 billion of additional spending pressures were known to the Treasury at that point in time, but were not known to the OBR as it prepared its forecast. It's true that this review didn't confirm the £22 billion figure, but it also did not necessarily prove that it was incorrect, because Labour's figure included pressures which were identified after the OBR prepared its forecast and so were beyond the scope of the OBR's review. We've written more about how the Government reached the figure of £22 billion in our explainer on this topic. How big is the increase in NHS appointments? Ms Reeves took the opportunity to congratulate Health Secretary Wes Streeting for delivering 'three-and-a-half million extra' hospital appointments in England. The Government has previously celebrated this as a 'massive increase', particularly in light of its manifesto pledge to deliver an extra two million appointments a year. Ms Reeves' claim was broadly accurate – data published last month shows there were 3.6 million additional appointments between July 2024 and February 2025 compared to the previous year. But importantly that increase is actually smaller than the 4.2 million rise that happened in the equivalent period the year before, under the Conservative government – as data obtained by Full Fact under the Freedom of Information Act and published last month revealed. What do announcements on asylum hotels, policing, nurseries and more mean for the Government's pledges? Ms Reeves made a number of announcements that appear to directly impact the delivery of several pre-existing Labour pledges, many of which we're already monitoring in our Government Tracker. (We'll be updating the tracker to reflect these announcements in due course, and reviewing how we rate progress on pledges as necessary). The Chancellor announced an average increase in 'police spending power' of 2.3% a year in real terms over the course of the review period, which she said was the equivalent of an additional £2 billion. However, as police budgets comprise a mix of central Government funding and local council tax receipts, some of this extra spending is expected to be funded by increases in council tax precepts. Ms Reeves said this funding would help the Government achieve its commitment of 'putting 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and special constables into neighbourhood policing roles in England and Wales', a pledge we're monitoring here. The spending review also includes funding of 'almost £370 million across the next four years to support the Government's commitment to deliver school-based nurseries across England', which Ms Reeves said would help the Government deliver its pledge to have 'a record number of children being school-ready'. The Chancellor also committed to ending the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by the end of this Parliament, with an additional £200 million announced to 'accelerate the transformation of the asylum system'. When we looked last month at progress on the Government's pledge to 'end asylum hotels' we said it appeared off track, as figures showed the number of asylum seekers housed in hotels was higher at the end of March 2025 than it was when Labour came into Government.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
UK agrees to check-free land border for Gibraltar but EU controls for flights
The agreement on a 'fluid border' clears the way to finalise a post-Brexit deal on the territory with the EU. But those flying into Gibraltar from the UK will face one check from Gibraltarian officials and another by the Spanish on behalf of the EU. An agreement for the future relationship between the EU and the UK in relation to Gibraltar is now a reality. It is a historic agreement. — Fabian Picardo (@FabianPicardo) June 11, 2025 This is because the land border will allow those arriving by air access to the European Schengen free travel area unchecked once they are in Gibraltar. The UK and Gibraltar insisted the changes would not affect the British overseas territory's sovereignty. The airport will operate under a model similar to London's St Pancras station, where passengers pass through both UK and French passport checks to board international trains. Goods and customs checks will also eventually be removed in both directions under the agreement. The move could also see airlines start to add flights to Gibraltar from countries other than the UK in a boost to tourism. Officials say a hard border would have been introduced under the EU's incoming exit and entry control system if no deal was reached, causing delays for some 15,000 people who cross the border every day as every individual passport was checked. Talks on rules governing the border have been ongoing since Britain left the European Union in 2020. Foreign Secretary David Lammy said the previous Tory government left behind a situation that 'put Gibraltar's economy and way of life under threat'. He said the agreement was a 'breakthrough' after years of uncertainty. He said: 'Alongside the government of Gibraltar, we have reached an agreement which protects British sovereignty, supports Gibraltar's economy and allows businesses to plan for the long-term once again. 'I thank the chief minister and his government for their tireless dedication throughout the negotiations. The UK's commitment to Gibraltar remains as solid as The Rock itself.' Spanish foreign minister Jose Albares said the deal marked 'a new beginning' in the relationship between the UK and Spain. He said that Spain 'will guarantee free movement of people and goods', adding that Gibraltar would now be linked to the Schengen Area with Spanish authorities controlling entry and exit. I have always said nothing about Gibraltar, without Gibraltar. — David Lammy (@DavidLammy) June 11, 2025 President of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen welcomed the deal. In a post on X, she said: 'It safeguards the integrity of Schengen and the single market, while ensuring stability, legal certainty and prosperity for the region.' Gibraltar's chief minister Fabian Picardo said the deal would 'protect future generations of British Gibraltarians and does not in any way affect our British sovereignty'. 'Now is the time to look beyond the arguments of the past and towards a time of renewed co-operation and understanding. Now the deal is done, it's time to finalise the treaty,' he said. On Wednesday evening, Sir Keir Starmer spoke with Mr Picardo and thanked him for 'his years of hard work, commitment, and leadership to reach an agreement'. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez also had a phone call with Sir Keir, and congratulated the British PM because 'his Government had succeeded where others had failed'. The Conservatives have said they will carefully review the UK's agreement with the EU on Gibraltar's border to see if it crosses any 'red lines' the party set out during its own negotiations when in government. Shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel said: 'Gibraltar is British, and given Labour's record of surrendering our territory and paying for the privilege, we will be reviewing carefully all the details of any agreement that is reached.' Mr Lammy held talks with Gibraltar's leaders, members of the opposition and the business community before leaving the British overseas territory to head to Brussels on Wednesday morning. Gibraltar was ceded to the UK by Spain in 1713 and the population is heavily in favour of remaining a British overseas territory. The last time it voted on a proposal to share sovereignty with Spain, in 2002, almost 99% of Gibraltarians rejected the move. Gibraltar also hosts an RAF base at its airport and an important naval facility.
