Autumn statement unlikely to put big dent in tax burden – here’s why

Published

1 year ago

November 21, 2023

admin

It’s autumn statement time.

Once upon a time, these winter budgets used to be brief updates on the fiscal forecasts, never overshadowing the far more substantial main budget in the spring. Or at least so we’re told.

In practice, for as long as I’ve been covering economics, the autumn statement (or, as Gordon Brown used to call it, the pre-budget report) has simply been the chancellor’s second bite of the fiscal apple – a budget in all but name.

In other words, these statements are quite a big deal.

They have been used to raise taxes and cut them, to lift spending and lower it.

Indeed, it was at Jeremy Hunt’s first autumn statement last year that he introduced some of the tough measures designed to clear up the economic mess following predecessor Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-budget – freezing income tax and national insurance thresholds all the way until 2028, consigning millions of families to higher taxes.

This time around, we’re all being told that the story will be very different – in particular that tax cuts are now imminent.

We’ll get to those cuts in a moment – and the bizarre pantomime of a government claiming it is cutting taxes even as it does precisely the opposite – but let’s start by getting the “headroom” stuff out of the way.

If you’ve been following any of the coverage of the impending autumn statement, you’ll doubtless have read about how the chancellor may now be ready to start cutting taxes, because he’s been told he has enough “headroom” to do so.

It all sounds rather scientific, doesn’t it – as if a universal measure of fiscal probity has determined that now would be a sensible point to reduce taxation. Except, of course, it isn’t.

Actually in this case, “headroom” means something very specific indeed.

This government, like most of its predecessors since Gordon Brown, has set itself some fiscal rules designed to shore up confidence in its policymaking.

The main rule facing Mr Hunt is that he has committed to getting the national debt falling as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) within five years.

This is, I can’t emphasise enough, a self-imposed rule. Sure: in the light of what happened to the previous Tory government (which briefly eschewed fiscal rules) there’s a strong argument for these rules. But they are not, by any means, tablets of stone.

Regardless, the debt rule is where that notion of “headroom” comes from. By the end of the five-year forecast horizon mapped out in March (the budget – the last time these figures wreak havoc updated) the UK’s net debt was falling ever so slightly. The fall was equivalent to roughly £6.5bn. Voila: that’s the headroom!

Roll on another six months and a few things have changed.

First, the economy looks a bit bigger than it did in March. This is partly because it has grown a little faster than expected, but mostly because the Office for National Statistics has reassessed its opinion of the size of the economy.

Also, because inflation was higher than expected, the cash size of the economy looks a bit bigger, while the national debt’s size is less changed.

Tot it all up and, due to these mostly statistical artefacts, all of a sudden the national debt as a percentage of that GDP figure looks a bit smaller. The upshot is the apparent “headroom” against this rule is significantly larger: possibly £15bn or maybe even over £20bn.

These sums are, it’s worth underlining, quite arbitrary. They mostly don’t reflect either that the economy is much healthier than it was back in March, or indeed that the government’s decisions have made much difference to the scale of the national debt. They are marked against an entirely self-written fiscal rule. And anyway, the “headroom” the chancellor is left with is still smaller than his predecessors tended to enjoy.

Despite all of those provisos, the government is likely to use these rules as a justification to start cutting taxes.

Yet there’s a big proviso here too. The total tax burden (the amount of taxes we as a country pay as a percentage of our national income) is rising.

Indeed, on the basis of the latest Office for Budget Responsibility numbers, it’s far higher now than it was before Rishi Sunak became prime minister, and is set to rise to the highest level since comparable records began in 1948.

These are the pieces of context it’s worth bearing in mind ahead of this event.

The economy is flatlining. The scale of Britain’s total debt is now far, far higher than before the pandemic. And it’s hard to envisage a scenario where the overall tax burden ends the coming year lower than when this chancellor took over.

None of this will stop Mr Hunt and Mr Sunak putting as positive a gloss on the economic update as they can. But their task will not be easy.

Business

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Published

20 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Donald Trump’s trade war escalation has sparked a global sell-off, with US stock markets seeing the biggest declines in a hit to values estimated above $2trn.

Tech and retail shares were among those worst hit when Wall Street opened for business, following on from a flight from risk across both Asia and Europe earlier in the day.

Analysis by the investment platform AJ Bell put the value of the peak losses among major indices at $2.2trn (£1.7trn).

The tech-focused Nasdaq Composite was down 5.8%, the S&P 500 by 4.3% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average by just under 4% at the height of the declines. It left all three on course for their worst one-day losses since at least September 2022 though the sell-off later eased back slightly.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

Analysts said the focus in the US was largely on the impact that the expanded tariff regime will have on the domestic economy but also effects on global sales given widespread anger abroad among the more than 180 nations and territories hit by reciprocal tariffs on Mr Trump‘s self-styled “liberation day”.

They are set to take effect next week, with tariffs on all car, steel and aluminium imports already in effect.

Price rises are a certainty in the world’s largest economy as the president’s additional tariffs kick in, with those charges expected to be passed on down supply chains to the end user.

The White House believes its tariffs regime will force employers to build factories and hire workers in the US to escape the charges.

Economists warn the additional costs will add upward pressure to US inflation and potentially choke demand and hiring, ricking a slide towards recession.

Apple was among the biggest losers in cash terms in Thursday’s trading as its shares fell by almost 9%, leaving it on track for its worst daily performance since the start of the COVID pandemic.

Concerns among shareholders were said to include the prospects for US price hikes when its products are shipped to the US from Asia.

Other losers included Tesla, down by almost 6% and Nvidia down by more than 6%.

Many retail stocks including those for Target and Footlocker lost more than 10% of their respective market values.

The European Union is expected to retaliate in a bid to put pressure on the US to back down.

The prospect of a tit-for-tat trade war saw the CAC 40 in France and German DAX fall by more than 3.4% and 3% respectively.

The FTSE 100, which is internationally focused, was 1.6% lower by the close – a three-month low.

Financial stocks were worst hit with Asia-focused Standard Chartered bank enduring the worst fall in percentage terms of 13%, followed closely by its larger rival HSBC.

Among the stocks seeing big declines were those for big energy as oil Brent crude costs fell back by 6% to $70 due to expectations a trade war will hurt demand.

The more domestically relevant FTSE 250 was 2.2% lower.

A weakening dollar saw the pound briefly hit a six-month high against the US currency at $1.32.

There was a rush for safe haven gold earlier in the day as a new record high was struck though it was later trading down.

Sean Sun, portfolio manager at Thornburg Investment Management, said of the state of play: “Markets may actually be underreacting, especially if these rates turn out to be final, given the potential knock-on effects to global consumption and trade.”

He warned there was a big risk of escalation ahead through countermeasures against the US.

Sandra Ebner, senior economist at Union Investment, said: “We assume that the tariffs will not remain in place in the
announced range, but will instead be a starting point for further negotiations.

“Trump has set a maximum demand from which the level of tariffs should decrease”.

She added: “Since the measures would not affect all regions and sectors equally, there will be winners and losers as in 2018 – although the losers are more likely to be in the EU than in North America.

“To protect companies in Europe from the effects of tariffs, the EU should not respond with high counter-tariffs. In any case, their impact in the US is not likely to be significant. It would be more efficient to provide targeted support to EU companies in the form of investment and stimulus.”

Business

British businesses issue warning over ‘deeply troubling’ Trump tariffs

Published

20 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

British businesses issue warning over 'deeply troubling' Trump tariffs

British companies and business groups have expressed alarm over President Donald Trump’s 10% tariff on UK goods entering the US – but cautioned against retaliatory measures.

It comes as Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds launched a consultation with firms on taxes the UK could implement in response to the new levies.

Money blog: Pension top-up deadline days away

A 400-page list of 8,000 US goods that could be targeted by UK tariffs has been published, including items like whiskey and jeans.

On so-called “Liberation Day”, Mr Trump announced UK goods entering the US will be subject to a 10% tax while cars will be slapped with a 25% levy.

The government’s handling of tariff negotiations with the US to date has been praised by representative and industry bodies as being “cool” and “calm” – and they urged ministers to continue that approach by not retaliating.

Business lobby group the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) said: “Retaliation will only add to supply chain disruption, slow down investment, and stoke volatility in prices”.

Industry body the British Retail Consortium (BRC) also cautioned: “Retaliatory tariffs should only be a last resort”.

‘Deeply troubling’

While a major category of exports, in the form of services – like finance and information technology (IT) – has been exempted from the tariffs, the impact on UK business is expected to be significant.

Mr Trump’s announcement was described as “deeply troubling for businesses” by the CBI’s chief executive Rain Newton-Smith.

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) also said the tariffs were “a major blow” to small and medium companies (SMEs), as 59% of small UK exporters sell to the US. It called for emergency government aid to help those affected.

“Tariffs will cause untold damage to small businesses trying to trade their way into profit while the domestic economy remains flat,” the FSB’s policy chair Tina McKenzie said. “The fallout will stifle growth” and “hurt opportunities”, she added.

Companies will need to adapt and overcome, the British Export Association said, but added: “Unfortunately adaptation will come at a cost that not all businesses will be able to bear.”

Watch dealer and component seller Darren Townend told Sky News the 10% hit would be “painful” as “people will buy less”.

“I am a fan of Trump, but this is nuts,” he said. “I expect some bad months ahead.”

Industry body Make UK said the 25% tariffs on cars, steel and aluminium would in particular be devastating for UK manufacturing.

Cars hard hit

Carmakers are among the biggest losers from the world trade order reshuffle.

Auto industry body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said the taxes were “deeply disappointing and potentially damaging measure”.

“These tariff costs cannot be absorbed by manufacturers”, SMMT chief executive Mike Hawes said. “UK producers may have to review output in the face of constrained demand”.

The new taxes on cars took effect on Thursday morning, while the measures impacting car parts are due to come in on 3 May.

Business

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Published

20 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Economists immediately started scratching their heads when Donald Trump raised his tariffs placard in the Rose Garden on Wednesday.

On that list he detailed the rate the US believes it is being charged by each country, along with its response: A reciprocal tariff at half that rate.

So, take China for example. Donald Trump said his team had run the numbers and the world’s second-largest economy was implementing an effective tariff of 67% on US imports. The US is responding with 34%.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

How did he come up with that 67%? This is where things get a bit murky. The US claims it studied its trading relationship with individual countries, examining non-tariff barriers as well as tariff barriers. That includes, for example, regulations that make it difficult for US exporters.

However, the actual methodology appears to be far cruder. Instead of responding to individual countries’ trade barriers, Trump is attacking those enjoying large trade surpluses with the US.

A formula released by the US trade representative laid this bare. It took the US’s trade deficit in goods with each country and divided that by imports from that country. That figure was then divided by two.

So, in the case of China, which has a trade surplus of $295bn on total US exports of $438bn, that gives a ratio of 68%. The US divided that by two, giving a reciprocal tariff of 34%.

This is a blunt measure which targets big importers to the US, irrespective of the trade barriers they have erected. This is all part of Donald Trump’s efforts to shrink the country’s deficit – although it’s US consumers who will end up paying the price.

But what about the small number of countries where the US has a trade surplus? Shouldn’t they actually be benefiting from all of this?

That includes the UK, with whom the US has a surplus (by its own calculations) of $12bn. By its own reciprocal tariff formula, the UK should be benefitting from a “negative tariff” of 9%.

Instead, it has been hit by a 10% baseline tariff. Number 10 may be breathing a sigh of relief – the US could, after all, have gone after us for our 20% VAT rate on imports, which it takes issue with – but, by Trump’s own measure, we haven’t got off as lightly as we should have.