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””
Janice Robinson
RT @leftfootfwd: IFS: Budget was "regressive" http://bit.ly/9CVpcG
RoseRed
Maybe I was in shock or denial yesterday or maybe I just hadn’t read enough analysis but it didn’t feel quite as bad as I expected. This morning reality set in. Surely I am not the only one truly afraid of what this budget could mean.
http://www.yorkshirerosered@blogspot.com
Andy Sutherland
RT @leftfootfwd: IFS: Budget was "regressive" http://bit.ly/9CVpcG
Jonathan Holt
RT @leftfootfwd: IFS: Budget was "regressive" http://bit.ly/9CVpcG
IFS: Budget was “regressive” « The best Labour blogs
[…] More… […]