UK ministers issue contradictory tax messages

Stay in view of the free updates

Simply subscribe to UK tax Myft Digest – it is delivered directly to your inbox.

The government gave contradictory signals about its covenants to spare “workers” from higher taxes, as Chancellor Rachel Reeves faces questions about how to fill a deep black hole in the United Kingdom’s public financial affairs.

Darren Jones, the main secretary of the Ministry of Treasury, appears to create an area for the tax height in the autumn budget, as he pledged that the “address rate” of the main taxes would not change, rather than excluding wider changes.

Reeves gave a wider commitment on Monday, as it promised that the government will not increase the taxes that workers – their income tax, their national secure and value -added tax. “

In addition to confusion, the ministers presented contradictory definitions for “workers”, which sparked a discussion about those who will be saved from the threat of high taxes.

“The Labor Party statement has always pledged a space for interpretation, and the subsequent references to” workers “,” Paylips “and” those who have a modest income “have not added a lot of clarity to what is inside or outside the scope of change.

Economists are Economic expectations.

But she linked her hands before the general elections for the past year, and excludes increases in the largest revenue taxes in the work statement-national insurance contributions to employees, value-added tax and basic, higher or additional income tax rates.

While she and colleagues insist that they adhere to the statement, the tax pledge is tested seriously through economic reality.

Speaking to BBC on Monday, Jones seemed to indicate that the Labor Party’s obligations focused on tax rates.

He said: “We have made a very clear commitment to protecting Paylips workers by not increasing the income tax rate or the employee’s national insurance and not increasing the value -added tax rate.” “This was a very clear promise in the elections.”

This can allow the Ministry of Treasury to maintain the value -added rate unchanged by 20 percent, for example, with the expansion of the rule on which the tax is imposed by changing the soils or reducing the generosity of exemptions from the tax.

Reducing the value -added tax threshold for companies over time, from 90,000 pounds to 30,000 pounds, can collect, for example, about 2 billion pounds of the government, according to Corlette.

There are increasing expectations that Reeves will connect the opening in its financial plans by extending the income and allowances of the income and allowances, the so -called “ghost tax” presented by the governors, after 2028.

This also would raise revenues while leaving personal tax rates unchanged.

Reeves decided in the budget last year not to extend the freezing, which the Institute of Financial Studies said said by Al -Khanj, which Al -Khanq said would benefit from 9.2 billion pounds by the end of this parliament. At that time, she said that “the extension of the threshold freezing will harm the working people.”

Speaking on Monday, Reeves made a broad pledge on tax changes. “We were really clear in our statement about the taxes that we will not increase,” she said. “We will not increase the taxes paid by workers, income tax, national insurance and value -added tax.”

Other ministers have given conflicting definitions to people who will seek protection.

Heidi Alexander, Minister of Transport, told Sky News on Sunday that “we have committed in our statement not to put taxes on people on modest income and working people.”

A reference to people about the “modest income” began a discussion about whether it was a tenth attack on the middle classes.

Jones told ITV that the idea of humble income “means different things for different people.” He said that the main pledge is the commitment of the Labor Party statement “to protect the income of workers through Paylips”.

In its budget last October, Reeves increased the national insurance contributions to the employers by 25 billion pounds, and insisted that this did not violate the commitment to the statement – even if the Treasury confesses that workers will end up to pay a wage.

At the same time, the other ministers refused to close the talk about “Wealth tax“Although experts believe Reeves believes more likely to increase current tax rates instead of reaching a completely new tax.

“The workers deserve honesty, and it is not from the linguistic linguistic every time a direct question is asked.”