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.
52 Responses to “IFS: Budget was “regressive””
Aviv Katz
RT @sophiaparker: wouldn't fancy being a lib dem today http://bit.ly/atIrAT great chart from IFS about exactly how 'progressive' budget was
Progressives should unite for a fairer, slower reduction plan | Left Foot Forward
[…] but fair” and “progressive” have quickly unravelled following analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Financial Times, and by Tim Horton and Howard Reed on this blog. Despite Nick Clegg’s […]
John Ruddy
So much for the lib dem claim to have made this better-newsflash it aint RT @leftfootfwd: IFS: Budget was "regressive" http://bit.ly/bGNf1T
James Lock
RT @sarumcassock: IFS say the budget was 'regressive' – absolutely scandalous. #iblamenick 4 propping up #thesameoldtories http://bit.ly/9CVpcG
Look Left - The Week in Fast Forward | Left Foot Forward
[…] evidence from the Institute of Fiscal Studies forecasts the Budget’s overall impact to be […]