Times admits ‘Labour’s £1000 tax on families’ story was wrong

The paper's front page frightner was 'inaccurate' - even contained its own correction


The Times newspaper on Friday, April 24, ran a front page story claiming a Labour government would mean £1000 more tax for ‘every working family’.

Today, just over a week later, the paper has admitted this was completely false.

The original story saw the headline ‘Labour’s £1000 tax on families’ plastered on the paper’s front page. It began:

“Ed Miliband would saddle every working family with extra taxes equivalent to more than £1000, according to an independent comparison with Conservative plans.”

Times £1000

This morning’s Times carries a mea culpa that says: “This was inaccurate.”

Here’s the correction in full:

“We said ‘Ed Miliband would saddle every working family with extra taxes equivalent to more than £1000’ (‘Labour’s £1000 tax on families’, April 24). This was inaccurate. The calculation assumes that the extra taxes are shared equally among what the Office for National Statistics defines as ‘working households’ (where all those over the age of 16 are working).

In fact, as we explained elsewhere in the article, ‘the bulk of Labour’s tax rises will come form a raid on the richest pension pots, a ‘mansion tax’ on properties worth more than £2 million, the re-introduction of the 50p rate and additional levies on banks and tobacco firms’. Some of these taxes and levies will only apply to companies, and the others will affect a small minority of families, not ‘every working family’ as we reported.”

Times wrong

In other words, the story was total nonsense, and even contained its own correction when first published!

Labour’s tax plans, as laid out in the second quote, sound exactly like how Labour has described them – raising taxes on well-off pensioners, properties over £2million, top earners with the 50p rate and banks and tobacco companies.

The paper had no reason to claim ‘every working family’ would be ‘saddled’ with an extra £1000 in taxes.

The Institue for Fiscal Studies, on whose analysis the story was supposedly based, said no such thing.

Whether this was a mistake at the Times itself, or at Conservative party HQ, is unclear.

Adam Barnett is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow MediaWatch on Twitter


Like this story? Click here to support MediaWatch via our crowd-funding page.


Read more: Tory press blasts Miliband on Labour spending and the crash. But he’s right

David Cameron met with anti-gay pastor who believes in witches

Sign up for our weekly newsletter by clicking here

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

34 Responses to “Times admits ‘Labour’s £1000 tax on families’ story was wrong”

  1. Selohesra

    Where was the outrage when Guardian printed untrue story about NotW deleting emails on Millie Dowler’s phone? At lleast Times printed their appology fairly quickly – Guardians was too late to save the jobs of the NotW journalists

  2. Cole

    MediaWatch didn’t exist then, matey. And your ‘whataboutery’ is irrelevant anyway. Do you think it’s ok for Murdoch’s Times to splash lies all over its front page and then issue a tiny apology days later?

  3. Selohesra

    And you really think they would have cared if they had been around? – no they will only gain credibility when they highlight bias from both sides including the anti UKIP bias of BBC

  4. Gerschwin

    Don’t worry everyone – It’s a girl! Hooorah!

  5. Gerschwin

    If it undermines the Labour PIErty Cole then my answer would be ‘Yes, I think it’s absolutely wonderful.’

Comments are closed.