Rachel Reeves has refused to rule out breaking her manifesto pledge not to raise certain taxes, as she lays the groundwork ahead of the budget later this month.
Asked directly by our political editor Beth Rigby if she stands by her promises not to raise income tax, national insurance or VAT, the chancellor declined to do so.
She told Rigby: “Your viewers can see the challenges that we face, the challenges that are on [sic] a global nature. And they can also see the challenges in the long-term performance of our economy.”
She went on: “As chancellor, I have to face the world as it is, not the world as I want it to be. And when challenges come our way, the only question is how to respond to them, not whether to respond or not.
“As I respond at the budget on 26 November, my focus will be on getting NHS waiting lists down, getting the cost of living down and also getting the national debt down.”
‘Each of us must do our bit’
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
Ms Reeves’s comments to Rigby came after a highly unusual pre-budget speech in Downing Street in which she set out the scale of the international and domestic “challenges” facing the government.
What did Labour promise in their manifesto?
Rachel Reeves has refused to say whether she will hike taxes, but what exactly was her manifesto commitment last year?
She said: “We will ensure taxes on working people are kept as low as possible.
“Labour will not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase national insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of income tax, or VAT.”
She also hinted at tax rises, saying: “If we are to build the future of Britain together, each of us must do our bit for the security of our country and the brightness of its future.”
Despite her promise that last year’s budget – which was the biggest tax-raising fiscal event since 1993 – was a “once in a parliament event,” the chancellor said that in the past year, “the world has thrown even more challenges our way,” pointing to “the continual threat of tariffs” from the United States, inflation that has been “too slow to come down,” “volatile” supply chains leading to higher prices, and the high cost of government borrowing.
She also put the blame squarely on previous Tory governments, accusing them of “years of economic mismanagement” that has “limited our country’s potential,” and said past administrations prioritised “political convenience” over “economic imperative”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:09
Sky’s Beth Rigby said there will be ‘almighty backlash’ after budget, as chancellor failed to rule out breaking tax pledges.
Ms Reeves painted a picture of devastation following the years of austerity in the wake of the financial crisis, “instability and indecision” after that, and then the consequences of what she called “a rushed and ill-conceived Brexit”.
“This isn’t about re-litigating old choices – it’s about being honest with the people, about the consequences that those choices have had,” she said.
‘I don’t expect anyone to be satisfied with growth so far’
The chancellor defended her personal record in office so far, saying interest rates and NHS waiting lists have fallen, while investment in the UK is rising, and added: “Our growth was the fastest in the G7 in the first half of this year. I don’t expect anyone to be satisfied with growth of 1%. I am not, and I know that there is more to do.”
Amid that backdrop, Ms Reeves set out her three priorities for the budget: “Protecting our NHS, reducing our national debt, and improving the cost of living.”
Cutting inflation will also be a key aim in her announcements later this month, and “creating the conditions that [see] interest rate cuts to support economic growth and improve the cost of living”.
She rejected calls from some Labour MPs to relax her fiscal rules, reiterating that they are “ironclad,” and arguing that the national debt – which stands at £2.6trn, or 94% of GDP – must come down in order to reduce the cost of government borrowing and spend less public money on interest payments to invest in “the public services essential to both a decent society and a strong economy”.
She also put them on notice that cuts to welfare remain on the government’s agenda, despite its humiliating U-turn on cuts to personal independence payments for disabled people earlier this year, saying: “There is nothing progressive about refusing to reform a system that is leaving one in eight young people out of education or employment.”
Image: Chancellor Rachel Reeves delivered a highly unusual pre-budget speech from Downing Street. Pic: PA
And the chancellor had a few words for her political opponents, saying the Tories’ plan for £47bn in cuts would have “devastating consequences for our public services,” and mocked the Reform UK leadership of Kent County Council for exploring local tax rises instead of cuts, as promised.
Concluding her speech, Ms Reeves vowed not to “repeat those mistakes” of the past by backtracking on investments, and said: “We were elected to break with the cycle of decline, and this government is determined to see that through.”
‘Reeves made all the wrong choices’
In response to her speech, Conservative shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride wrote on X that “all she’s done is confirm the fears of households and businesses – that tax rises are coming”.
He wrote: “The chancellor claims she fixed the public finances last year. If that was true, she would not be rolling the pitch for more tax rises and broken promises. The reality is, she fiddled the fiscal rules so she could borrow hundreds of billions more.
“Every time the numbers don’t add up, Reeves blames someone else. But this is about choices – and she made all the wrong ones. If Rachel Reeves had the backbone to get control of government spending – including the welfare bill – she wouldn’t need to raise taxes.”
Former US Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler renewed his warning to investors about the risks of cryptocurrencies, calling most of the market “highly speculative” in a new Bloomberg interview on Tuesday.
He carved out Bitcoin (BTC) as comparatively closer to a commodity while stressing that most tokens don’t offer “a dividend” or “usual returns.”
Gensler framed the current market backdrop as a reckoning consistent with warnings he made while in office that the global public’s fascination with cryptocurrencies doesn’t equate to fundamentals.
“All the thousands of other tokens, not the stablecoins that are backed by US dollars, but all the thousands of other tokens, you have to ask yourself, what are the fundamentals? What’s underlying it… The investing public just needs to be aware of those risks,” he said.
Gensler’s record and industry backlash
Gensler led the SEC from April 17, 2021, to Jan. 20, 2025, overseeing an aggressive enforcement agenda that included lawsuits against major crypto intermediaries and the view that many tokens are unregistered securities.
The industry winced at high‑profile actions against exchanges and staking programs, as well as the posture that most token issuers fell afoul of registration rules.
Gary Gensler labels crypto as “highly speculative.” Source: Bloomberg
Under Gensler’s tenure, Coinbase was sued by the SEC for operating as an unregistered exchange, broker and clearing agency, and for offering an unregistered staking-as-a-service program. Kraken was also forced to shut its US staking program and pay a $30 million penalty.
The politicization of crypto
Pushed on the politicization of crypto, including references to the Trump family’s crypto involvement by the Bloomberg interviewer, the former chair rejected the framing.
“No, I don’t think so,” he said, arguing it’s more about capital markets fairness and “commonsense rules of the road,” than a “Democrat versus Republican thing.”
He added: “When you buy and sell a stock or a bond, you want to get various information,” and “the same treatment as the big investors.” That’s the fairness underpinning US capital markets.
On ETFs, Gensler said finance “ever since antiquity… goes toward centralization,” so it’s unsurprising that an ecosystem born decentralized has become “more integrated and more centralized.”
He noted that investors can already express themselves in gold and silver through exchange‑traded funds, and that during his tenure, the first US Bitcoin futures ETFs were approved, tying parts of crypto’s plumbing more closely to traditional markets.
Gensler’s latest comments draw a familiar line: Bitcoin sits in a different bucket, while most other tokens remain, in his view, speculative and light on fundamentals.
Even out of office, his framing will echo through courts, compliance desks and allocation committees weighing BTC’s status against persistent regulatory caution of altcoins.
New figures reveal a 70% year-on-year increase in Cayman Islands foundation company registrations, with more than 1,300 on the books at the end of 2024, and over 400 new registrations already in 2025.
According to a news release from Cayman Finance, many of the world’s largest Web3 projects are now registered in the Cayman Islands, including at least 17 foundation companies with treasuries over $100 million.
Why DAOs are choosing Cayman
The Cayman foundation company has emerged as a preferred tool for DAOs that need to sign contracts, hire contributors, hold IP and interact with regulators, all while shielding tokenholders from personal liability for the DAO’s obligations.
The legal wake‑up call for many communities came in 2024 with Samuels v. Lido DAO, in which a US federal judge found that an unwrapped DAO could be treated as a general partnership under California law, exposing participants to personal liability.
The Cayman foundation company is designed to plug that gap, offering a separate legal personality and the ability to own assets and sign agreements, while giving tokenholders assurance that they are not partners by default.
Rise in Cayman Islands foundation company registrations | Source: Cayman Finance
Add tax neutrality, a legal framework familiar to institutional allocators and an ecosystem of companies that specialize in Web3 treasuries, and it becomes clear why more projects have quietly redomiciled their foundations to Grand Cayman.
Elsewhere, policymakers have made big promises but delivered patchwork. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly pledged to turn the United States into the “crypto capital of the planet,” but at the entity level, only a handful of states explicitly recognize DAOs as legal persons.
Switzerland remains the archetypal onshore Web3 foundation center, with the Crypto Valley region now hosting over 1,700 active blockchain firms, up more than 130% since 2020, with foundations and associations representing a growing share of new structures.
The surge in Web3 foundations coincides with a shift in Cayman’s own regulatory posture — the arrival of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Crypto‑Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), which the Cayman Islands has now implemented via new Tax Information Authority regulations that take effect from Jan. 1, 2026.
CARF will impose due diligence and reporting duties on Cayman “Reporting Crypto‑Asset Service Providers” (entities that exchange crypto for fiat or other crypto, operate trading platforms or provide custodial services), requiring them to collect tax‑residence data from users, track relevant transactions and file annual reports with the Tax Information Authority.
Legal professionals note that CARF reporting under the current interpretation applies to relevant crypto-asset service providers, including exchanges, brokers and dealers, which likely leaves structures that merely hold crypto assets, such as protocol treasuries, investment funds, or passive foundations, off the hook.
“The key question is whether your entity, as a business, provides a service effectuating exchange transactions for or on behalf of customers, including by acting as a counterparty or intermediary or by making available a trading platform.”
In practice, that means many pure treasury or ecosystem‑steward foundations should be able to continue benefitting from Cayman’s legal certainty and tax neutrality without being dragged into full reporting status, so long as they are not in the business of running exchange, brokerage or custody services.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves has suffered another budget blow with a rebellion by rural Labour MPs over inheritance tax on farmers.
Speaking during the final day of the Commons debate on the budget, Labour backbenchers demanded a U-turn on the controversial proposals.
Plans to introduce a 20% tax on farm estates worth more than £1m from April have drawn protesters to London in their tens of thousands, with many fearing huge tax bills that would force small farms to sell up for good.
Image: Farmers have staged numerous protests against the tax in Westminster. Pic: PA
MPs voted on the so-called “family farms tax” just after 8pm on Tuesday, with dozens of Labour MPs appearing to have abstained, and one backbencher – borders MP Markus Campbell-Savours – voting against, alongside Conservative members.
In the vote, the fifth out of seven at the end of the budget debate, Labour’s vote slumped from 371 in the first vote on tax changes, down by 44 votes to 327.
‘Time to stand up for farmers’
The mini-mutiny followed a plea to Labour MPs from the National Farmers Union to abstain.
“To Labour MPs: We ask you to abstain on Budget Resolution 50,” the NFU urged.
“With your help, we can show the government there is still time to get it right on the family farm tax. A policy with such cruel human costs demands change. Now is the time to stand up for the farmers you represent.”
After the vote, NFU president Tom Bradshaw said: “The MPs who have shown their support are the rural representatives of the Labour Party. They represent the working people of the countryside and have spoken up on behalf of their constituents.
“It is vital that the chancellor and prime minister listen to the clear message they have delivered this evening. The next step in the fight against the family farm tax is removing the impact of this unjust and unfair policy on the most vulnerable members of our community.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:54
Farmers defy police ban in budget day protest in Westminster.
The government comfortably won the vote by 327-182, a majority of 145. But the mini-mutiny served notice to the chancellor and Sir Keir Starmer that newly elected Labour MPs from the shires are prepared to rebel.
Speaking in the debate earlier, Mr Campbell-Savours said: “There remain deep concerns about the proposed changes to agricultural property relief (APR).
“Changes which leave many, not least elderly farmers, yet to make arrangements to transfer assets, devastated at the impact on their family farms.”
Samantha Niblett, Labour MP for South Derbyshire abstained after telling MPs: “I do plead with the government to look again at APR inheritance tax.
“Most farmers are not wealthy land barons, they live hand to mouth on tiny, sometimes non-existent profit margins. Many were explicitly advised not to hand over their farm to children, (but) now face enormous, unexpected tax bills.
“We must acknowledge a difficult truth: we have lost the trust of our farmers, and they deserve our utmost respect, our honesty and our unwavering support.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:54
UK ‘criminally’ unprepared to feed itself in crisis, says farmers’ union.
Labour MPs from rural constituencies who did not vote included Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower), Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury), Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire), Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley), and Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall), Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk), Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby), Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk), Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth), Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay), Perran Moon, (Camborne and Redruth), Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire), Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal), Henry Tufnell (Mid and South Pembrokeshire), John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) and Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr).