In recent years I have come to learn that the devil is often in the detail when it comes to Labour Budgets. Rarely is the detail disclosed in what the Chancellor says on the floor of the House of Commons.
Yesterday was no exception.
By freezing the individual personal allowance (the amount every taxpayer is permitted to earn before they start to pay income tax) every taxpayer is £48 a year worse off and £96 a year worse off for a married couple (or indeed an unmarried couple!)
The size of the deficit is now so great that the Government will have to borrow more this year and next year than the entire receipts from income tax! Astonishing.
David Nuttall 
Wrong!
The freezing of personal allowances was announced in the pre-budget report (PBR), not hidden in this budget. For some time personal allowances have been indexed to the RPI of the September prior to the PBR. The RPI September 2009 was actually negative.
I know this is all very technical and beyond your pay grade, seeing as your job is kissing babies and regurgitating central office press releases, but at the very least you should acknowledge that calling for the raising of personal allowances is not compatible with your being appalled by the size of the PSBR.
If you are really keen to raise personal allowances, vote Liberal Democrat!
Hi Ewan,
Thanks for your comment. I think most people will be looking at the inflation rate now rather than some months ago.
David
You are not ‘most people’. You are aspiring to high office. You should know that the announcement of personal allowances for 2010-2011 had already been made and as such failure to reiterate it in the budget speech was not particularly underhand. I hope you do, so you are just taking the cheap shot I am calling you on, rather than demonstrating ignorance.
Has George Osborne made any commitment to reform the budget process so that personal allowances are indexed closer to the budget?
A raise in personal allowances would cost the treasury £2.2 billion (Daily Telegraph 09/12/2009). ‘Most people’ knew we could not afford any unnecessary tax give aways.