FactCheck: Cameron’s 81p tax giveaway
“If you are looking at what we are doing with the personal allowance we are actually raising it in this tax year, so 24 million taxpayers will benefit to the tune of £6.50 per week”
Prime Minister David Cameron, 5 April 2012
The background
Families with children across the country woke up to the news that from tomorrow they’ll be an average of £511 worse off a year.
Brandishing research by The Institute for Fiscal Studies, Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls said the government’s changes to tax, benefits and tax credits was a “bombshell” for families.
The dawn of the new tax year tomorrow has since been duly hailed as Black Friday by some, yet the Conservatives have hit back arguing that Mr Balls was “ignoring” the millions of households that will be better off.
Stepping into the fray this afternoon, the Prime Minister said he did “not accept the figures” from the IFS.
He added: “If you are looking at what we are doing with the personal allowance we are actually raising it in this tax year, so 24 million taxpayers will benefit to the tune of £6.50 per week.”
It was a surprise rebuff for the highly respected IFS, so we asked the think-tank to explain its case.
The analysis
The tax free threshold on income is to rise by £630 to £8,105 from tomorrow. This will benefit almost every tax payer in the country – though many will also lose money from other reforms that are coming in.
The Tories maintain however that 24 million will gain from the move, even after taking into account the changes to tax credits.
IFS economist Robert Joyce, author of the report quoted by Labour, explained that Mr Cameron’s figure includes the effect of inflation – and even if the government had sat back and done nothing, the personal tax allowance would have gone up in line with inflation.
So how much does inflation change things?
“In terms of the reform that’s coming in tomorrow, the personal allowance is going up by £630 in cash terms – it would have gone up by £420 anyway just because of inflation – so the extra is £210.
“That’s the extra that it’s going up by because of the government’s reforms. So that means that people are saving 20 per cent of £210 – that’s the tax they would have paid on that income before.
“That works out at £42 a year or about 80 pence a week.”
The verdict
Raising the tax-free threshold on personal income will benefit 24 million people but not by as much as Mr Cameron claims. Even if the government hadn’t raised the threshold, it would have gone up with inflation.
As Mr Joyce told us: “If the question is ‘what effect have the government’s reforms had on people?’ then the appropriate thing to do is to look is to look at the effect of raising the personal allowance by more than would have happened by default – and that means not including the effect of an inflation increase.”
Strip out inflation, and you’re not looking at £6.50 a week; you’re looking at 81p a week – or 16p per working day.
By Emma Thelwell
Update: Our economics editor Faisal Islam says: “You can just about get to the £6.50 a week number if you include rises in the state pension for 5 million state pensioners, and the inflation rise in other benefits. But classifying a real freeze, i.e. an increase in line with inflation, as a giveaway seems rather heroic. Furthermore do government politicians really believe that they are giving away £8bn tomorrow? If so, can we presume the debt crisis over?”
Follow @FactCheck and @FaisalIslam on Twitter



There are 14 comments on this post
Does the calculation of £511 take into account inflation or is that a cut in cash. If a cut in cash terms with the same rate of inflation then even freezing the amount for an average family would mean that they lose £340.66 in real terms. That would mean a freeze would make the “average family” 3-4 pence a week more in real terms than they get with the cut.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“But classifying a real freeze, i.e. an increase in line with inflation, as a giveaway seems rather heroic.”
Heroic – that’s far too grand a word. Downright misleading and mendacious would be more accurate.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Given the state of the government budget, raising allowances with inflation IS a give away – a borrowed one.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Have you noticed how when in Opposition politicians laud the IFS’s critiques of Government policies, but reject them when in Government. They are “independent & respected” when the politician is in opposition or when the IFS analysis agrees with his, but plainly they suddenly become disrespected and biased the moment their analysis doesn’t bear out government lies/misleading/selective statements. Cameron, Balls, etc need to realise that we trust the IFS 100% more than we trust any politician. If politicians showed the same level of integrity in their use of data & their preparedness to explain it & its limitations, they might find the began the long hard journey to regain a little public trust.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Although Labour typically refer to “families,” my single friend says that he will be as hit by the change of the rule that says one has to work more hours to get tax credits. In their speeches they get “families,” “households” and “people” conflated as though they’re the same. Not true. However, when Labour was in power, those with families were treated generously compared to those without kids. So you might say this is something that’s going a way towards redressing that imbalance. Lastly, Labour are again quiet on what they would CUT if in government. When will they tell us?
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Chancellors have been known not to increase allowances with inflation. The option is there.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Well as a lecturer my new increased pension contributions means that along a few million other public servants I will be worse off. Will my pension be greater with the new contributions, NO, the money is an extra tax being used to pay off the bankers debt.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
This is a case of a question being framed around the answer.
“As Mr Joyce told us: “If the question is ‘what effect have the government’s reforms had on people?’ then the appropriate thing to do is… not including the effect of an inflation increase.”
But that isn’t the headline that the study supposedly stands up, which is the claim that “Families with children across the country woke up to the news that from tomorrow they’ll be an average of £511 worse off a year.”
There are no caveats there about ‘real terms’ or whether the changes are uniquely deriving from this year’s budget.
Most people deal with the totality of their income and expenditure – it’s what’s left at the end that counts, not whether the measure that gets there is statutory indexation or a specific reform.
The IFS appears to be deliberately answering a narrow question to drive its own publicity.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Chancellors have been known not to increase allowances with inflation. The option is there.”
Not really an option for Osborne, though, because he had to give the LibDems something in return for cutting the higher rate of tax.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
What world does David Cameron live in??????the cost of living is rising everyday, wages are frozen, there are water restrictions, no bank returns on savings, fuel prices are the 3rd highest in the world, the bankers are getting huge bonuses, the water company bosses are getting 2 million pounds bonus, even the police get a bonus for nicking you, I’m surprised they do not give a bonus to our troops for each rebel they shoot.
Whilst in Europe recently Supermarket fuel prices on diesel is 1.15 per litre, and each day there was a fluctuation on the price both up and down, this was to reflect the Euro against the dollar and the rise and fall of the barrel price, something that never happens here, only an upward rise whether the dollar or barrel price changes, no where in the media or among the people was there any talk of racism, the European countries governments and police supported the original citizens…… Anyway back to the subject what the hell can anyone do with an extra 6.50 per week it will buy nothing.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I was astounded by Faisal’s interpretation of of the actual breakdown on offer from the Government. Well done and thank you
There seems to be a deliberate policy by this Governement to mislead the electorate, which has a very serious consequence insofar as basic trust is concerned.
Little wonder the polls are so low for Cameron,Clegg, Milliband and the rest of the career politicians.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Rubbish £511 worse off a year?? Where did that figure come from and who exactly does it refer to? My husband and I are are over £500 a MONTH worse off and can barely make ends meet. Thanks to the rising cost of living and the tax credit cuts that have come into force since April.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Depends. I understand that the argument is that many who don’t actually need the tax credits under the old received them. If being middle class is a joint income of £40,000 per year and more (£30,000 per annum for a single person), most people would agree with that sentiment. Thereby, in effect, depriving lower income groups of more money (ie higher levels of credit)and stopping those like many singles from receiving credits at all.
Like or Dislike:
0
0