View this email in your browser ([link removed])
Hands off our homes!
They’ve come for the farms. They’ve come for the family business. Now, ministers are eyeing up the family home. As our increasingly desperate chancellor scrambles around to fill the £50 billion black hole in her budget, her latest not-so-bright idea is to levy a new tax on family homes.

The central proposal, based on a report from the Onward think tank, seems to be that a new property tax will be levied on homes as a replacement for council tax and stamp duty land tax. On the face of it, that might not be such a bad idea. It could well simplify the system and ease some of the problems in the housing market (give a listen to this week’s episode of a nation of taxpayers below for more on that one).
[link removed]
But the lightest of scratches beneath the surface show Labour’s interpretation of this plan looks like it’ll be a wealth ta ([link removed]) x in all but name that hammers homeowners, particularly the ‘asset-rich cash-poor’, who will find themselves clobbered as a result of the increase in house prices we’ve seen over the last few decades.

In an explainer thread ([link removed]) on X, Elliot Keck highlighted “If you do apply the tax to everyone, then what you’re introducing is a wealth tax in all but name. And given it’s levied at the relatively low level of £500,000, it would amount to a family home tax.” Following up in the Telegraph, Elliot called out this plan for what it is ([link removed]) : “A wealth tax that allows cowardly politicians to temporarily delay the confrontation with reality they need: the fact that we simply cannot go on spending the way we are.”

Rounding off a tour de force of opposition, Elliot took to the airwaves when he spoke to Mike Graham ([link removed]) on Talk explaining to listeners: “There’s an element of class war about it. I think the government are looking at the middle class with contempt and loathing and they want to force them out of their homes and hand over some of their wealth to the state.”
An Englishman’s home is his castle as the saying goes, it’s not a means for beleaguered chancellors to punish hard working families in a desperate bid to plug the hole created by her own incompetence and refusal to get spending under control. That’s why we’re calling on you to write to your MP using our handy tool ([link removed]) to make your opposition to the family homes tax clear before Reeves puts her disastrous plan into action.

Our tax system is well overdue a radical overhaul, but any simplifications must at least be revenue neutral and should really be easing the record-high tax burden Brits are struggling under.

Help the TPA continue standing up for taxpayers by clicking here to donate ([link removed])
Britain’s most hated small tax
On this week’s episode of a nation of taxpayers, Duncan Barkes hosted what he called a “clash of the tax titans” as four of us piled into the TPA studio to make our cases for which small tax we hate the most and why it should be scrapped.
Maurice Cousins from Net Zero Watch ([link removed]) , Maxwell Marlow of the Adam Smith Institute ([link removed]) and YIMBY Initiative ([link removed]) , joined Callum McGoldrick and myself in making our two minute pitches followed by some cross-examination, before voting for Britain’s worst small tax.

Find out who won by listening to the latest episode of a nation of taxpayers on Apple Podcasts ([link removed]) , Spotify ([link removed]) , and YouTube ([link removed]) .
[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]
We’re going backwards on migration
Another week, another set of poor migration statistics. Far from getting the numbers crossing the channel and housed in hotels down, there are now nearly 2,500 more migrants in hotels than when Labour came to office. This is an eight per cent increase despite the government’s pledge to “smash the gangs” and end the use of hotels. ([link removed]) Meanwhile, just four per cent of those arriving in small boats have been returned since 2018.

Of course, as John O’Connell and Rory McGregor wrote last week ([link removed]) , the only way to really get this problem under control is to leave the ECHR. In case you missed it, have a read of their piece here ([link removed]) .
Naturally with the growing cost falling on the shoulders of taxpayers, it was a key part of what William Yarwood spoke about when he visited the Reform UK branch in Altrincham and Sale West.

If you’d like a TPA spokesman to come and speak to your organisation, get in touch (mailto:[email protected]?subject=TPA%20speakers) .
Foamy Finances: Why Your Pint Costs More Than It Should
If you’ve visited your local recently, you’ll know just how much a pint of your favourite tipple seems to be leaving a bit more of a dent in your wallet than it once did. But what’s actually driving the prices of our pints? In a post on the TPA blog ([link removed]) , political commentator, Benjamin, Byung Hoon, Ko, points the finger firmly at tax.
As Benjamin writes: “A pint £5.50 will have £0.54 of beer duty and £0.92 of VAT, which translates to a quarter of the cost of the pint being tax. That’s before you apportion business rates… Britain’s beer drinkers are paying over the odds because the Treasury is hooked on the pipe dream of higher beer duty meaning higher duty revenue. However, the reality is the complete opposite. The government’s unreasonably high beer duty only results in the loss of pubs, jobs, and communities, for short-term tax grabs.” Have a read of Benjamin’s post here ([link removed]) .
The national debt skyrockets
Migration and the price of a pint aren’t the only things on the up, the national debt has shot up by a whopping £186 billion in Labour’s first year in office. TPA analysis ([link removed]) this week revealed the shocking state of the public finances. Like their predecessors, ministers seem in no hurry to get spending under control.

These latest figures show the current government has added £6,510 to every household’s share of the national debt. Every taxpayer is now on the hook for an eye-watering £73,171! There’s no way to sugarcoat it, this is an intergenerational burden that will see our children and grandchildren paying for the borrowing of today. You can see the current level of the national debt on our Debt Clock here ([link removed]) .

Darwin Friend summed it up perfectly ([link removed]) when he told the Daily Mail: “The fundamental truth is that Britain has a borrowing problem because politicians have a chronic spending addiction.” Our findings were also the focus of Harvey Jones’ op-ed in the Express which you can read here ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
Elliot sat down in the GB News studio (he had a busy week didn’t he) blasting ([link removed]) : “Debt interest alone is now at about £110 billion a year… This government came in saying that they really cared about the finances but since then all they’ve done is spend like there’s no tomorrow!”

Wanting to tackle our country’s spending addiction isn’t based on some niche economic theory or fringe conspiracy . The debt burden is simply unsustainable and successive governments have failed to grapple with it. Bringing down our enormous debt must now become a national priority!
A closer look at “A Minimum Income Standard for Students”
When we saw a report claiming students need a minimum of £61,000 over the course of their degrees to enjoy a socially acceptable standard of living, it’s fair to say it raised some eyebrows in the TPA office. With only 56 per cent of graduates now expected to pay back their loans ([link removed]) , taxpayers are already on the hook for an extraordinary bill.

So what is actually meant by “a minimum income standard for students”? Shimeon Lee takes a look in this week’s blog ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
The definition of “minimum” is highly questionable as Shimeon notes: “Among the items needed to maintain this “minimum” with quote “no nice to haves” are a 40 inch television (split among flatmates), a Bluetooth speaker, wireless headphones, a full length mirror, fancy dress, mattress protector and topper, a weekend holdall (separate from an everyday backpack), as well as an “above-entry-level” laptop (with at least 8GB of RAM).” And that’s before a budget of more than £500 is allocated for alcohol pre-drinks. Have a read of Shimeon’s takedown of these absurd ideas here ([link removed]) .
War on Waste
A new investigation from Joanna Marchong, reveals that the Foreign Office lost almost 30,000 working days to sickness in 2023-24 ([link removed]) . A rise of 51 per cent on the previous year. Even more staggeringly, absences linked to mental health issues soared by 77 per cent, with 8,399 days written off and a sharp jump in the number of staff signed off entirely.

Get the full rundown of Joanna’s findings here ([link removed]) .

Benjamin Elks
Grassroots Development Manager

[link removed]

============================================================
** Twitter ([link removed])
** [link removed] ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
Copyright © 2025 The TaxPayers' Alliance, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in to receiving our updates, or we have a legitimate interest to contact you about our work.



TaxPayers' Alliance is a trading name of The TaxPayers' Alliance Limited, a company incorporated in England & Wales under company registration no. 04873888 and whose registered office is at 55 Tufton Street, London SW1P 3QL.



You can read our privacy notice here: [link removed]
Our mailing address is:
The TaxPayers' Alliance
55 Tufton Street
London, London SW1P 3QL
United Kingdom
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.