"Those with the broadest shoulders should pay their fair share," said Rachel Reeves — before quietly aiming for the shoulders of pensioners across Britain.
In what's shaping up to be the most creative reinterpretation of a manifesto promise since "no income tax rise" mysteriously became "well, technically…", Labour is reportedly planning a 2p income tax hike in the upcoming Budget — the first in fifty years.
🧮 The Great Balancing Act
For workers, the pain is sugar-coated: a 2p cut in National Insurance means most employees won't notice much difference in their take-home pay. But for the country's nine million pensioners — who don't pay NI — the Treasury's balancing act looks more like a banana skin.
- Basic-rate workers: unaffected.
- High earners (£100,000): about £1,000 worse off.
- Additional-rate pensioners (£125,140+): an eye-watering £2,502.80 extra tax a year.
"Broad shoulders," indeed — though the people bearing them are increasingly stooped under the weight of rising tax bands and heating bills.
🧓 Silver Squeeze, Golden Promises
This is the same government that promised not to raise income tax, VAT or NI — but now appears ready to tick one of those boxes after all. Reeves has told the OBR to expect "major measures" to plug a £ black-hole in public finances after higher borrowing costs and lower productivity forecasts.
Add in the move to drag unspent pensions into inheritance tax from 2027 — potentially clawing back up to 67% of leftover savings — and you have the makings of a pensioner pincer movement.
Then there's the winter fuel payment U-turn. Yes, technically everyone over state pension age gets it again — £200 for under-80s, £300 for over-80s — but anyone earning over £35,000 will hand it straight back via tax. The Treasury calls that "targeted support." Most people would call it a loan with seasonal interest.
🧠Think Tank Theatrics
Even Labour's favourite think-tank, the Fabian Society, is getting in on the act, calling the current 25% tax-free lump sum "too generous" and urging Reeves to slash it to £100,000. Because, apparently, saving responsibly is now "systemically unfair."
A Treasury spokesperson, of course, refused to confirm anything:
"We do not comment on speculation around changes to tax outside of fiscal events."
Translation: We're absolutely thinking about it.
