Blog: When Paying Tax Could Save You Money

30th October 2024

Shelagh Young reflects on today’s budget announcements in the context of our recent Great Risk Transfer research on the changed relationship between employees and employers in the context of financial wellbeing.

---

Has the Government broken its promise not to increase taxes on working people by increasing employer’s payroll costs?

No one can pretend that the 1.2% increase in employer’s National Insurance Contributions (NICS) and reduction in the threshold at which this tax kicks in announced in Rachel Reeves’s budget statement won’t increase costs to business.

But, is arguing, as many critics have, that this amounts to a tax on workers backed by evidence?

The immediate budget post-mortem, driven partly by the opposition’s outraged response, delved into questions of whether voters were betrayed. But while the trustworthiness of Governments obviously matters, these are surely not the most important questions to be focused on in the aftermath of what is generally agreed to have been a very significant budget indeed.

Trotting out common sense assumptions that a tax on employers is a tax on the workers simply isn’t good enough.

Superficially it seems obvious that many employers will pass on this cost - for example in higher prices to consumers, lower wage rises, redundancies or reductions in growth through recruitment meaning a contraction of the jobs market. 

Indeed the same was said when the National Minimum Wage (NMW) was first introduced and will no doubt be said about other measures in this budget which will increase the NMW significantly in 2025.

Unfortunately for the critics there is very little evidence that such measures do have the dire negative impact on “working people” so often predicted by the business sector and its representatives.

For one thing this budget, like others before it, maintained and, in some cases increased the corporate welfare measures that will reduce the impact on some employers.

In the case of NICS, the Employment Allowance was increased significantly meaning that the smallest employers with four or fewer employees on the NMW will pay no employer NICS at all. But, over time, there will be other ways in which many employers can compensate for higher taxes.

Paying more to spend less

For example, if this budget really does lead to greater investment in the NHS and other important public services, might employers need to spend less on mitigating the impact of poor public services by providing ever more costly employee benefits?

Earlier this year we explored how employers were addressing diminishing employee wellbeing.  Measures being taken ranged from enhanced private healthcare plans including services such as “virtual” GPs to schemes offering loans for rent deposits.

The reasons for investing in employee wellbeing were clear - employers are seeking to reduce absenteeism and increase productivity by mitigating the stresses and strains affecting their employees many of which they attribute to matters such as the difficulty people have in accessing NHS care, expensive housing and childcare and even, poor public transport

So the question we would like to add into the budget debate mix is why employers and their representatives rarely mention the costs to business of what the Chancellor referred to as public services that are “on their knees”?

Whether or when this budget will achieve the Government’s stated goal of “rebuilding Britain” remains to be seen but the hope that it could help rebalance the burden of risk employers currently bear for the poor health and wellbeing of their workers should not be ignored.

Blog: Are we singing a new song?

29th August 2024

by David Gow, DHI Trustee

"Fings can only get worse," Sir Keir Starmer intoned in the 10 Downing Street rose garden on August 27 in a reverse reprise of Labour's 1997 campaign song . "Before they get better." He added that the UK should "accept short-term pain for long-term gain." It's a tough ask but maybe Scots at least are up for it.

Perhaps, indeed. What emerges from our latest quarterly survey of voter sentiment towards the Scottish Economy, Understanding Scotland, is that Scots are increasingly torn between feeling (a shade) more upbeat and anxious, between modest optimism and continuing pessimism.

Certainly, more than half (56%) of the 2227 respondents to the survey conducted exactly a month after the July 4 General Election still think Scotland is heading in the wrong direction but that's six points down on the record 62% in May while those believing the opposite are up four points at 23%. 

What's more, fears about the cost of living/inflation at 58% are down close to levels last seen in January 2022 (56%), probably reflecting the upturn in earnings and even (some) lower prices. (The survey pre-dates Ofgem's announcement of a 10% hike in energy guide prices). Most tellingly, those thinking that general economic conditions are worse than 12 months ago have fallen to 52% (net) or the lowest level since the survey began in October 2021. Personal negativity is down to 42% from a high of 65% in November 2022 while optimism is up to 15% (net) - hardly a dizzying decline but worth monitoring to see if it upticks

As we and our colleagues at the Diffley Partnership say in the report's intro, "a growing proportion are unsure about the country’s direction, suggesting a populace still searching for clarity in uncertain times." As we point out, there remains a significant sense of precarity, notably among families with children.

Unhealthy options among the poor

More than one in five (22%) is still cutting back on fruit and veg to cut food bills, a bad signal for a nation fighting rampant obesity, while a similar number is reducing meal/portion sizes to save money - the same goal pursued by the 14% skipping meals. It's surely bad news that more than a half (52%) admits to shopping on price rather than health, while a quarter or more is eating processed food and/or cheap food requiring little or no cooking. And we know from here and elsewhere that it's poorer parents, particularly young mothers, who skimp on meals so they can feed their kids.

Financial resilience remains worryingly high among less well-off households. A third of households with children are not confident they could raise £100 in an emergency without borrowing, a level that rises to 58% when the required loan is £500. Inequality may not be a substantial policy issue (at just 8%) but poverty remains among the biggest priorities (27%).

Tax and spend alerts

Ahead of the October 30 Budget (UK) and the Scottish Government's renewed brake on spending, concern about manging public finances is on the up - at 29% compared with 24% a year ago. And a third remains convinced spending on public services is an important issue facing the Scottish economy. Rachel Reeves' "black hole" is clearly and understandably putting the wind up a lot of folk., including actual and/or potential pensioners (a concern for 12% or up three points on May.)

Will hospital consultation/treatment waiting lists come down? Obviously, it's too soon to tell but healthcare and the NHS remain by far the biggest concern (51%) - compared with the mere 8% thinking of the constitution, an issue that does not win elections. Nor, surprisingly, do green/climate change issues (just 11%, down one point on May).

Unsurprisingly, however, immigration and crime are rising up people's political agenda, with the former at a survey peak of 13% (up three points on May) and the latter at a new high of 11% (up two points). The two are often wrongly linked, notably in tabloid media, but both may well prove growing headaches for the new UK government. We shall closely monitor trends here.

Overall, it's clear from this survey that the new UK government and whichever administration emerges from the elections to Holyrood due in May 2026 have a lot to do to convince a sceptical population that those "sunlit uphills" can be glimpsed around the corner. Again, hardly surprising after this dreich summer...

End

Press Release: Bare minimum from many employers driving poor productivity

A “tired and stressed workforce” could derail the new government’s efforts to boost the UK economy.

New research published today by the David Hume Institute shows that a third of employers only provide the bare minimum when it comes to sick pay and pensions.

The report, “The Great Risk Transfer”, highlights how staff in hospitality, retail and social care are the most financially vulnerable and that over a quarter of Scots lose sleep over money worries.

The research finds:

• more than two-thirds of employers (70 per cent) are concerned over the impact of financial strain on their employees and their productivity, citing increased stress on managers and other staff (35 per cent) and a rise in absenteeism due to poor health (28 per cent)

But

• a third of employers (33 per cent) in Scotland do not offer any enhanced benefits as part of their employee benefits package. 

• more than half (56 per cent) do not currently include financial wellbeing in strategies to support employees. 

Susan Murray, director of the David Hume Institute,said

“It is hard for the economy to thrive when a quarter of the workforce is losing sleep over their finances. Over two-thirds of employers have noticed the impact of financial strain on people’s performance at work. It is imperative that the UK Government forges ahead with plans to update employment legislation. Steps must be taken to rebalance the risks for people and the economy to thrive now and in the future.”

The Great Risk Transfer report recommends the need to:  

• Recognise employers’ power to drive change. Employers should recognise the connection between financial wellbeing and productivity and how their actions might alleviate employee’s pressures.  

• Increase understanding of Living Pensions: Government and employers should work together to increase understanding of the need for Living Pensions and that employees on auto-enrolment minimums are not currently likely to be saving enough to live well in retirement.

• Complete the Pension Provision Review. The review of pensions provision signalled by the Labour Party before the 2024 election should go ahead and include a specific focus on potential improvements and innovations in workplace pensions.

David Thomson, Head of Policy and Public Affairs at the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries, which part-funded the research, said: “The transfer of risk from institutions to individuals is not necessarily bad but the evidence suggests that this is falling unevenly, with many not always understanding the risk. It would be wise to ensure that the “dials are set” to balance the risk of the individual against the institution.”

Catherine McWilliam, from the Institute of Directors, which represents 1,000 business leaders and decision-makers in Scotland said: “The findings chime with feedback from our members. We have had a decade of uncertainty and fire-fighting in Scotland with rising costs against the backdrop of a tight labour market. We need to have an honest and transparent discussion to find solutions with the private sector working with the government.”

Scott Edgar, of the Diffley Partnership, said: “Our research shows that the majority of employers cite some concerns over the impact of financial strain on their employees. In particular, they highlight issues such as increased stress and rising absenteeism linked to financial wellbeing issues, which are affecting productivity and overall workplace wellbeing."

NOTES TO EDITORS

• The Great Risk Transfer: employment and financial wellbeing analyses the shift in responsibility for financial wellbeing from institutions, such as governments and employers, to individuals. The report is based on qualitative and quantitative research with employees and businesses – ranging in size from 60,000 employees to less than ten - across Scotland. Read the full report.

• The David Hume Institute commissioned the Diffley Partnership, an independent research agency based in Edinburgh, to investigate employer attitudes to the Great Risk Transfer. The survey was conducted in May and June 2024 and is based on responses from 550 businesses. The survey results is published as an appendix to the main report here.

Press Release: Globally renowned Scottish expert to shape policy to end the housing emergency

 12th August 2024

Professor Duncan Maclennan to lead a major project for the Edinburgh based think tank, the David Hume Institute

The David Hume Institute has announced a new programme of work with Professor Duncan Maclennan to look at the actions needed to transform the housing system in Scotland.

Housing is essential infrastructure for people and the economy. Currently too many people are unable to find a home or are living in poor quality housing that is affecting their health and their ability to be productive and thrive.

The work will look at the actions needed in the whole system from homelessness, unaffordable rents and planning, to skills shortages and supply-chain issues. 

Professor Maclennan has had a long and internationally distinguished career as an applied economist specialising in housing, neighbourhoods and cities. His professional roles have spanned senior positions in both academic and government settings, in the UK, Canada and Australia. At the University of Glasgow in the 1980s he established and led the Centre for Housing and Urban Research, and in the 1990s directed the ESRC Cities and Competitiveness Program and Joseph Rowntree Foundation programs on Housing Finance, Housing and the Macro-Economy and Housing and Area Regeneration. In recent years he has advised governments in Australia and Canada on housing system shifts to improve economic and environmental outcomes.

Professor Maclennan said

“I am delighted to be working with the David Hume Institute again to help understand the housing emergency. Difficult housing outcomes - homelessness, rising rent burdens and lengthening queues for social housing, falling home-ownership rates for the under 40’s - have spread and deepened for decades. They reflect a failure both of  income growth, especially for poorer Scots, and of the functioning of the housing system that has driven the sustained rise of housing prices ahead of incomes.

The roots of the emergencies in the overall housing system need to be understood and their consequences, not least for the economy and environment, recognised. Policy solutions may involve additional rights and fiscal resources, but the scale of emerging difficulties means that we urgently need to disrupt how we govern, plan and deliver new and improved homes that work for people, places, the economy and the environment. The work will aim to deliver proposals that can act to reduce difficulties now but will also frame a transformation of Scotland’s  housing system for the decades ahead”

Ken Ross, David Hume Institute Trustee and former Chair of both the Scottish Property Federation and Scottish House-Builders Association said

“I am proud that we have initiated this ambitious project to follow-up Duncan’s previous work for the David Hume Institute, A Scotland of Better Places. Business as usual is not an option. This project will help take Scotland’s housing system from a hideous emergency to one fit for the future to ensure this vital infrastructure is there to support people and the economy.”

ENDS

Notes to Editors

• The David Hume Institute is an independent think tank based in Scotland. The charity was established in 1985 to increase diversity of thought on the economy and related public policy. Find out more on our website

• About Professor Duncan Maclennan: Duncan was a member of the Board of Scottish Homes from 1989 until 1999 and then  spent a decade working in government, as special Adviser to the First Minister of Scotland, as a Chief Economist in the Government of Victoria and as Chief Economist in Canada’s Federal Department for Infrastructure and Cities. He has acted as adviser to Ministers in the UK, Scotland, France, Poland and Norway, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.  He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, the Academy of Social Sciences and Honorary Member of the Royal Town Planning Institute, The Chartered Institute of Housing and the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors. He was awarded a CBE for services to UK housing research in 1997. He remains affiliated to the University of Glasgow as an Emeritus Professor of Urban Economics and holds Professorial appointments in Housing Economics at McMaster University (Ontario) and UNSW (Sydney).

Blog: Stressed out - the cost of shifting risk from institutions to individuals

by Shelagh Young, DHI Engagement Lead

Do you do a good day’s work after a poor night’s sleep? Do financial worries stop you focusing on the other things that matter in life - on family and friends, on your health or your job? 

Stress and anxiety have been the leading causes of lost working days in the UK for some time. But, despite increased productivity being seen as an essential component of economic growth, the impacts of stress and anxiety on the productivity of people who feel well enough to still go to work is comparatively less well measured or understood. 

Last month we reported that more than one in four Scots are losing sleep over their finances. In July the ONS reported the weakest annual growth since the first quarter of 2013 (excluding the Covid-19 pandemic period) and the weakest productivity output of worker per worker since 2009.

Are these two dismal facts related?

We think so. The research charity Centre for Mental Health calculates that mental health related  presenteeism, defined as being present at work but not fully functioning, costs the UK economy at least £21.2 billion a year in lost productivity. 

In the light of this it is obvious that government needs to lead on reducing stress and anxiety in order to boost wellbeing and therefore productivity. It cannot offload all of this responsibility onto employers, especially as not everyone is employed. Employers can rightly be held to account for reducing work-related stress and anxiety but the wider causes are not theirs alone to solve.

One of these sources of stress is the impact of what the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries (IFoA) calls The Great Risk Transfer. This is best described as a shifting of the burden of risk, such as ensuring our workplace pensions yield sufficient returns to keep us out of poverty in retirement,  from institutions to individuals. The IFoA argued that significant changes relating to pensions, work, health and insurance are placing more of the burden of risk on individuals with potentially socially and economically undesirable outcomes. 

We will be exploring our  research on this topic in a forthcoming lecture at the University of Edinburgh Business School. This work, which was supported by the IFoA,  found that the changes the IFoA identified were often poorly understood by the people most affected and not always their top priorities. For example, while the IFoA included precarity at work in its exploration of risk transfers, our research revealed greater front of mind concerns about precarity in housing.

We found that most people had a very partial understanding of the financial risks they were facing but that did not mean they were unaffected by financial risk-related stress. We heard a lot about the stress of coping with financial responsibilities and that was before the cost of living rose so dramatically. This matters because stress is not just a problem of presenteeism or individual unhappiness. Chronic stress causes long-term and profound health problems including weight gain, heart disease and strokes. All of these are a major concerns when it comes to costs to the public purse. 

We will be following up on our work around risk soon to find out more about what could be done to enable people to cope better. But the one thing we know already is that, while actuaries are professionally trained in risk-management, most of the rest of us are not. We need people to stay healthy enough to be at work but we also want their minds on their jobs for the sake of productivity. It is simply not good enough to design and implement policies that overload people with ever greater and more complex responsibilities which mean, as the FT described it earlier this year, we all need to be actuaries now.

ENDS

Click here to book for our upcoming event in partnership with the University of Edinburgh Business School.

Press release: Is trust a must for a brighter economic future?

“Trust plays a crucial role in a successful economy.”  says Charlie Woods, the author of the latest David Hume Institute Discussion Paper launched today ahead of an on-line event on Thursday 23 May at 1.30pm. Is this being overlooked by business and political leaders who are seeking solutions to weaker than desired economic performance?

DHI Director, Susan Murray, will be joined in this webinar conversation from New York by Dr David M. Bersoff, from the Edelman Trust Institute, Charlie Woods, the paper’s author, and leading mediator John Sturrock , who works to build trust in negotiations.

David will share the global context on trust from the 2023 Annual Trust Barometer to help explore the relevance of trust to the economy and the labour market.

At a time when the majority of Scots are concerned about household finances, think Scotland is heading in the wrong direction economically and are pessimistic about our economic future, are we paying sufficient attention to the potential of increasing trust to boost economic performance?

David Hume Institute Director Susan Murray says:

“Research shows a strong relationship between levels of trust in society and economic performance with more trusting societies generating more income per person than others. Thinking differently about what helps boost economic performance might reveal we have been looking for too long in the wrong places to find the Holy Grail of a more productive Scottish workforce.”

The webinar is free to watch here.

ENDS

Notes to Editors

• For media enquiries contact Shelagh Young, David Hume Institute, shelaghyoung@davidhumeinstitute.org

• The Discussion Paper: Is Trust an undervalued ingredient for a thriving economy? Is available here

• The 2023 Annual Trust Barometer can be found here

• The David Hume Institute is an independent think tank based in Scotland. The charity was established in 1985 to increase diversity of thought on the economy and related public policy. Find out more on our website

New Report: Scotland's Productivity Challenge

Scottish productivity has all but stalled in the last fifteen years and a turnaround is required if future living standards are to improve. This report makes recommendations for government, policymakers, business and trade unions, based on the conclusions of new research and case studies. It details five evidence-based stories of what has worked in comparable places and draws lessons from their experiences. In each case a ruthless focus on evidence, building consensus across the political divide, and developing strong and credible institutions were all necessary to turn things around.