George Osborne claimed it was a "progressive Budget". Analysis by the independent IFS shows that, stripping away pre-announced measures, it was a "regressive Budget".
A picture says a thousand words. The respected, independent Institute for Fiscal Studies today said clearly that , “likely … overall impact of yesterday’s measures was regressive”.
By 2014-15, the distributional impact of tax and benefit measures is only “progressive” if the pre-announced decisions made by Labour – including the 50p income tax rate – are included. The IFS are clear that the Treasury’s claims only hold valid, “because of reforms announced by the previous government”. Stripping them out means that George Osborne’s dictum is wrong.
This analysis – consistent with Left Foot Forward’s own yesterday, the Financial Times’ and Nick Pearce on Open Democracy – could not be clearer: taken on its own, it was a regressive Budget.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
52 Responses to “IFS: Budget was “regressive””
Ian Hopkinson
RT @DuncanStott: I reckon the IFS is wrong on this http://bit.ly/9CVpcG Why strip out the impact of Labour's budget? That's not what's h …
Hitchin England
IFS: Budget was "regressive" http://bit.ly/9CVpcG via @leftfootfwd
Craig Roters
IFS say the budget was 'regressive' – absolutely scandalous. #iblamenick 4 propping up #thesameoldtories http://bit.ly/9CVpcG
paulsimpson1976
RT @leftfootfwd: IFS: Budget was "regressive" http://bit.ly/9CVpcG
Jacquie Martin
Glad to see in pictures what common sense tells us. Utter disgrace. ConDemnation was never truer.