The £10,000 personal tax allowance: anything but progressive

In yesterday's budget George Osborne announced that the personal income tax allowance would be raised to £10,000 from next year, earlier than 2015 as originally planned. Superficially taking people out of income tax does sound like a tantalising prospect - poorer people will have more money in their pockets, will they not? There are two major problems with this.

In yesterday’s budget George Osborne announced that the personal income tax allowance would be raised to £10,000 from next year, earlier than 2015 as originally planned.

This has been lauded by some in the media as a progressive measure. Cue the Telegraph:

The Government had planned to raise the threshold to £10,000 by the end of this parliament, but George Osborne fast-tracked the plan to help low-income households.

And according to yesterday’s Mail:

Millions of Britain’s hard-pressed taxpayers will find themselves up to £705 better off after the coalition today delivered on its flagship tax cut a year early.

Superficially taking people out of income tax does sound like a tantalising prospect – poorer people will have more money in their pockets, will they not?

There are two major problems with this.

As the below graph shows, the greatest percentage change in net income from the personal tax free allowance of £10,000 is seen by those on the upper end of the income scale – not, as is often claimed, low earners. The important line is the purple one (or is it maroon?), which accounts for the policy as proposed by George Osborne.

The blue line represents the Liberal Democrats original proposal which Osborne has adopted without the corresponding adjustment of the higher rate threshold.

10 thousand allowance

For one thing, the policy only benefits those who earn enough to pay tax. Many individuals have income below the income tax threshold of £8,105. Analysis carried out for Left Foot Forward in 2010 found that some three million households in the poorest quarter of the household income distribution would not benefit from raising the personal allowance to £10,000.

That’s right, three million of the poorest households gain nothing from the change.

As the report also concludes, increasing the personal allowance serves to increase the gap between the bottom and the middle, resulting in low income households falling behind relative to the middle.

The reason it benefits those on the right of the graph more than it does those on the left is because a raise in the personal tax allowance cuts tax for everyone since all benefit from a higher tax threshold.

Another concern for the Left should be the move away from the idea of contribution. An important facet of the welfare state is the notion that everyone contributes into a pot which is then available in times of need.

Indeed, one of the challenges for progressives in the coming years will be making the connection in the minds of voters between the tax they pay and the benefits they receive from the welfare state. Or as the American Jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, that taxes are the price we pay for a civilised society.

Taking people completely out of income tax has the opposite effect, as Right-wing Tories are probably quite aware – their Liberal Democrat counterparts should know better.

It’s not only those on the Left who have in the past expressed concern about increasing the personal allowance. Here is David Willetts in 2005 (page five):

Increasing the threshold cuts the tax bill for everybody. It takes some people out of income tax, but it is worth most to people who are still paying income tax and get the full benefit of the higher threshold. When I asked the Treasury last year how much it would cost to raise the personal tax allowance to £10,000, it estimated the cost at £30 billion. Of this, only about £2 billion was spent on people who are taken out of tax altogether and it is worth least to people on low incomes who don’t get the full value of the policy…My conclusion is that we should both reform our tax system and help poor people. But these are different problems requiring different solutions (The Times, 23 June 2005).

20 Responses to “The £10,000 personal tax allowance: anything but progressive”

  1. John D Clare

    Raising the tax threshold is merely another Tory strategy to help companies pay lower wages.

  2. Lucas

    Indeed, the 40% tax rate has been lowered.

  3. Bob

    If the personal allowance is funded by increased tax rates, it is progressive. This is true but cutting tax rates won’t help those under 10k either.
    The best way to think of personal allowance increases is a reverse poll tax of £x above a certain number. This benefits the middle most, and the rich less as the £500 less in tax is worth less in proportional terms. The very rich(over £100,000) and poor see no change.
    Take these examples:
    A: A flat tax of 30%
    B: A flat tax of 40% but with a £10,000 personal allowance
    C: flat tax of 50% with a £10,000 citizens income
    B is more progressive than A, but C is much more progressive than either. A citizen’s income combined with a flat tax removes welfare traps and reduces money spent on administration. It can be very progressive (high flat tax e.g 60% and citizens income) or regressive (low citizens income of around £2500 and low tax rate.) Basically high earners pay back their citizens income or allowance in tax, so no need for means testing. Although it appears like tax and spending increased compared to means testing, ultimately it is what you get net from the system that matters, and most people will be better off due to low costs of administration.
    Left wingers should support a citizen’s income and flat tax. If the income is set at the poverty line, we have a chance to ABOLISH poverty in the UK. It is only the effective income tax rate that matters. This is transparent and the electorate can vote on the precise citizens income/tax rate. Also work is always encouraged and everyone is treated equally and fairly.

  4. Budget 2013 | Well Red

    […] proposal, who proposed the re-introduction of the 10p lower tax band, funded by a Mansion Tax. Here’s Left Footforward, arguing that the raising the limit is a policy designed to lock in th…, benefiting people earning between the 40% marginal rate threshold and £100K, when the claw back […]

  5. The Panama Papers Reveal Something We Already Knew: it’s One Rule for the Rich and Another for the Rest of Us – Hub Politic

    […] secret giveaways to the rich, for example, the increase in the personal allowance to £10,500 benefits the richest more than it does the poorest. In his resignation letter last month, Iain Duncan Smith […]

Comments are closed.