Connect with us

Published

on

The government’s “black hole” could be bigger than the £22bn it has claimed as cabinet ministers are being pressured to scrap projects immediately to fill it, Sky News understands.

After Labour won the election in July, Chancellor Rachel Reeves accused the previous government of leaving a £22bn shortfall in public finances they had not disclosed.

She promptly cancelled several projects, including 40 new hospitals, reforms to adult social care charges, a new Advanced British Standard qualification, and several road and train projects – and reduced the number of pensioners who will get the winter fuel allowance.

But speaking on the Politics with Jack and Sam podcast today, Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates said: “One of the things I’m told is that the overall black hole could be bigger than £22bn, because don’t forget, £20bn is just the gap in this financial year alone.”

He said the government has not yet had the numbers from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) but has had a rough forecast for the coming years.

“So they could have to fill an even bigger sum, these are massive amounts of money,” he added.

But because the black hole is for this year alone, it has to be filled quickly which poses the question of how to do that.

More on Uk Economy

Read more:
Which taxes could Labour increase?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Labour said there is a £22bn black hole

“I’m told that to fill an immediate in-year black hole, you can’t really use tax at all because it takes too long to set it up,” Sam said.

“So there will be tax rises. But they can’t really use that to solve this problem. And welfare decisions are the same really.

“You have to look to Whitehall spending, and most of all the Treasury want to scrap projects to fill this black hole that for accounting reasons as much as anything else, will be what the Treasury is pressuring cabinet ministers to look for.

“So those front pages about mad contracts, questions about rail and road projects, all of that will come under the most pressure in this process, because that’s where they think that they can get the money from.”

Pic: iStock
Image:
Capital Gains Tax could see an increase. Pic: iStock

Politico’s editor Jack Blanchard added governments “making very quick decisions on these projects they don’t really understand have a tendency sometimes to get them horribly wrong”.

“You may see very poor, controversial decisions being made in the budget where, you think you can get away with just srapping that little thing that no one cares about,” he added.

“And then, the budget blows up in your face and it’s these stories take a life of their own and you lose control of the narrative.

“That’s what Rachel Reeves and Downing Street will no doubt be worried about.”

The autumn budget is set to take place on 30 October, with tax rises expected to be announced after Sir Keir Starmer said it will be “painful”.

Inheritance and Capital Gains tax are the most likely to face an increase, with business rates also potentially seeing a change.

👉 Tap here to follow Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts 👈

Continue Reading

Politics

MEV trading returns to court in Pump.fun class-action lawsuit

Published

on

By

MEV trading returns to court in Pump.fun class-action lawsuit

A US court is once again being asked to weigh in on maximal extractable value practices after a judge allowed new evidence to be added to a class-action lawsuit tied to a memecoin platform.

The judge granted a motion to amend and refile to include new evidence a class-action lawsuit against memecoin launch platform Pump.fun, the maximal extractable value (MEV) infrastructure company Jito Labs, the Solana Foundation, which is the nonprofit organization behind the Solana ecosystem, and others.

The motion said over 5,000 pieces of evidence in the form of internal chat logs were submitted by a “confidential informant” in September that were previously unavailable. The filing said:

“Plaintiffs assert that the logs contain contemporaneous discussions among Pump.fun, Solana Labs, Jito Labs, and others concerning the alleged scheme, and that they materially clarify the enterprise’s management, coordination, and communications.”

Solana
The first page of the motion to amend the case to include new evidence, which was granted. Source: Burwick Law

The lawsuit, originally filed in July, alleges that the Pump.fun platform deliberately misled retail investors by marketing memecoin launches as “fair,” but engaged in a scheme with Solana validators to front-run retail participants through maximal extractable value (MEV).

Maximal extractable value is a technique that involves reordering transactions within a block to maximize profit for MEV arbitrageurs and validators. 

The plaintiffs allege that Pump.fun used MEV techniques to give insiders preferential access to new tokens at a low value, which were then pumped and dumped onto retail participants, who were used as exit liquidity by insiders.

Cointelegraph reached out to Burwick Law, the legal firm representing the plaintiffs, as well as Pump.fun, Jito Labs and the Solana Foundation, but did not receive any responses by the time of publication.

Solana
The allegations in the original lawsuit filing. Source: Burwick Law

The lawsuit could set a precedent for MEV cases in the United States, as the ethics of the practice continue to be debated within the crypto industry and legal bodies struggle to define proper regulations about the highly technical subject.

Related: Pump.fun co-founder denies $436M cash out, claims it was ‘treasury management’

The MEV bot trial leaves questions unanswered

Anton and James Peraire-Bueno, the brothers accused of using a MEV trading bot to make millions of dollars in profit, went to trial in November in the US.

Prosecutors argued that the brothers tricked victims out of their funds, but defense attorneys said that they were executing a legitimate trading strategy and did not do anything illegal.

The jury struggled to reach a verdict in the case, and several jurors requested additional information to clarify the complexities surrounding the technical specifics of blockchain technology.

The case ended in a mistrial after the jury was deadlocked and failed to reach a verdict, highlighting the complexity of adjudicating legal disputes surrounding the application of nascent financial technology.

Magazine: Meet the onchain crypto detectives fighting crime better than the cops