Facts and figures about UK taxes, benefits and public spending.
Income distribution, poverty and inequality.
Analysing government fiscal forecasts and tax and spending.
Analysis of the fiscal choices an independent Scotland would face.
Case studies that give a flavour of the areas where IFS research has an impact on society.
Reforming the tax system for the 21st century.
A peer-reviewed quarterly journal publishing articles by academics and practitioners.
|
Type: Observations Authors: Mike Brewer
The Labour party is pointing to the fact that the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats are proposing cuts to child tax credit for middle- to high-income families with children. I and colleagues have written about these cuts before in the 2010 Green Budget and our election analysis, and I summarise that work here. Both opposition parties want to save money by paying the family element of the child tax credit to fewer families with children. The child tax credit has two elements: a small family element, worth £545 a year for a family with children, and much larger child elements, worth up to £2,300 a year per child. The child elements are withdrawn as income rises, so that roughly the richer half of families with children do not receive them, and no party is proposing to make cuts to these. The family element does not start to be withdrawn until family income reaches £50,000 a year, and it is this here that the two parties are looking for cuts. Both cuts are small compared to total spending on tax credits (forecast to be £29 billion in 2010-11). The Conservative Party's manifesto says that they want to "stop paying tax credits to families with incomes over £50,000". But this does not describe their policy in full, leading us to call that description "incomplete at best and misleading at worst". The Conservative Party want to lower the £50,000 threshold to £40,000, so families with a combined income above £40,000 currently receiving child tax credit would lose some or all of that entitlement. As we have explained before, we are not able to estimate precisely how much this would save, but it would be between £45 million and £400 million a year. The Liberal Democrats want to make larger cuts by withdrawing the family element as soon as the child element has been withdrawn. For a 1-child family, this would mean that tax credits would not be paid to families with a combined income of around £25,500 if implemented today; each additional child would increase this value by around £6,080. We estimate this would save around £900 million a year, a little lower than £1.3 billion stated by the Liberal Democrats, which is based on a previous costing produced by IFS researchers which (unrealistically) assumed full take-up. Given the strength of Gordon Brown's recent rhetoric about these potential cuts, you may be surprised to hear that the family element of the child tax credit has been cut by 19% in real -terms by the current government over the past seven years. Since its introduction in 2003, its value has always been £545 a year, and the upper threshold always been £50,000; had these values been increased by inflation - as is normal for benefits and tax allowance - the family element would now be worth £670 a year, and be paid to families with incomes up to £61,500 a year. The bigger picture, though, is that many people consider that social security benefits and tax credits will be cut during the next Parliament by far more than is being admitted by the parties' manifestos. IFS analysis of the public spending plans set out by Alistair Darling in his last Budget suggest that departmental spending will fall by 11.9 per cent by 2014-15 in real-terms, but spending on welfare benefits and tax credits grow by 4.5 per cent over the same period. Obviously it is up to the next government to decide how much it wants to spend on public services and welfare benefits, but these diverging trends look unbalanced, and possibly unsustainable.
Search |
View all Observations in the series
Recent Observations
Cutting the deficit: three years down, five to go?
The UK is in the fourth year of a planned eight-year fiscal tightening. Following further announcements made in Budget 2013, this fiscal consolidation is now forecast to total £143 billion by 2017–18. The UK is intending the fourth largest fiscal consolidation among the 29 advanced economies for which comparable data are available. By the end of this financial year, half of the total consolidation is expected to have been implemented. However, within this tax increases and cuts to investment spending have been relatively front-loaded, while cuts to welfare spending and other non-investment spending have been relatively back-loaded.
Deficit unchanged
The March Budget forecast that borrowing would fall by £0.1 billion from £121.0 billion in 2011–12 to £120.9 billion in 2012–13. On Tuesday, the Office for National Statistics is due to release its first estimate of public sector net borrowing in March 2013 and, therefore, for the whole of 2012–13. Borrowing could easily end up being higher or lower than it was in the previous year, either due to backwards revisions, the uncertainty inherent in forecasting borrowing even a month in advance, or both. However, whether borrowing is slightly up or down in cash terms is economically irrelevant. Either way, the bigger picture is that having fallen by roughly a quarter between 2009–10 and 2011–12, borrowing is forecast to be broadly constant through to 2013–14.
Women working in their sixties: why have employment rates been rising?
Employment rates through the recession have been remarkably robust, with today’s ONS figures showing employment remaining close to 30 million. The young have experienced historically low employment rates and high unemployment rates but the employment rate of women aged 60 to 64 has increased as fast since 2010 as it did during the 2000s. An important explanation is the gradual increase in the state pension age for women since 2010, which has led to more older women being in paid work. Without this policy change, the employment rate for 60 to 64 year women would have been broadly flat since 2010.
|


