UK borrowing higher than forecast in June as debt interest costs soar
The ONS said interest payable on debt jumped to £16.4 billion due to a large rise in Retail Prices Index (RPI) inflation impacting index-linked government bonds.
June borrowing was higher than the £17.6 billion expected by most economists and the £17.1 billion forecast by Britain's independent economic forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).
Borrowing for the first three months of the financial year to date stood at £57.8 billion, £7.5 billion more than the same three-month period in 2024.
Richard Heys, acting chief economist at the ONS, said: 'The rising costs of providing public services and a large rise this month in the interest payable on index-linked gilts pushed up overall spending more than the increases in income from taxes and national insurance contributions, causing borrowing to rise in June.'
The ONS said so-called compulsory social contributions, largely made up of national insurance contributions (NICs), jumped by £3.1 billion to £17.5 billion last month – the highest ever recorded for June.
In the first three months of the financial year to date, these compulsory social contributions rose to £48 billion, up £7.5 billion year on year and marking another record.
It followed the move by Rachel Reeves in April to increase NICs for employers, which has seen wage costs soar for firms across the UK as they also faced a rise in the minimum wage in the same month.
Public sector net debt, excluding public sector banks, stood at £2.87 trillion at the end of June and was estimated at 96.3% of gross domestic product (GDP), which was 0.5 percentage points higher than a year earlier and remains at levels last seen in the early 1960s.
Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, said: 'We are committed to tough fiscal rules, so we do not borrow for day-to-day spending and get debt down as a share of our economy.'
But the figures will stoke fears the Government will be forced to hike taxes in the autumn budget.
Economist Rob Wood, at Pantheon Macroeconomics, said the Chancellor has a 'major problem' to overcome, 'created by U-turns on previously planned spending cuts and possible downgrades to OBR growth forecasts this autumn'.
He said: 'We estimate that the Chancellor's £9.9 billion of headroom has turned into a £13 billion hole, meaning that Ms Reeves would need to raise taxes or cut spending by a little over £20 billion in the autumn budget to restore her slim margin of headroom.
'We expect 'sin tax' and duty hikes, freezing income tax thresholds for an extra year in 2029 and a pensions tax raid – reinstating the lifetime limit on pension pots and cutting relief – to fill most of the hole.'
Shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride said: 'Rachel Reeves is spending money she doesn't have.
'Debt interest already costs taxpayers £100 billion a year – almost double the defence budget – and it's forecast to rise to £130 billion on Labour's watch.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
33 minutes ago
- Spectator
What's the score on ‘score'?
The courtship rituals of the Treasury and the Office for Budget Responsibility last ten weeks. The consummation is a fiscal event, such as the Budget coming in the autumn, if we survive. Eligible young ladies used to have dance cards on which to enter the names of their suitors. The Treasury has a scorecard on which its proposed measures are drawn up for the OBR to score. The analogy is with the cricket field rather than the ballroom. The OBR score indicates its forecast for spending, receipts and public debt. It also takes into account knock-on effects of a policy change. This is called dynamic scoring. I had to ask Veronica about this and, since it's years since she split up with her unsatisfactory City trader, she might have got it wrong. In 2021 the OBR had to explain that the dynamic effect of a rise in tobacco duty was so large that 80 per cent of the increase was lost to the Treasury. After the increase, people changed their behaviour: some gave up cigarettes, some rolled their own and not a few got cigarettes from illegal sources. Is that where all those Turkish barbers come in? There was a response that benefited government coffers when it cut the top rate of tax from 50 to 45 per cent in 2012. The static effect would have cost the Treasury £3.8 billion. But behavioural changes, such as hours worked, meant the OBR's estimate of the loss of revenue was only £100 million. Dynamic scoring shares an etymology with the score cut in pork skin to make crackling – from a productive ancient Germanic word that also gives us shear, shard and share (used for ploughing). Dynamic scoring is also a variant of the scoring done by our Anglo-Saxon forebears cutting a score in a stick every time they'd counted 20 sheep. 'The days of our age are threescore years and ten,' says the Psalm, 'and though men be so strong that they come to fourscore years, yet is their strength then but labour and sorrow.' We know the score.
Times
4 hours ago
- Times
Goldman Sachs boss: City's status is at risk
London's position as a global financial centre is 'fragile', the head of Goldman Sachs has warned. David Solomon, 63, said a combination of Brexit and not retaining increasingly mobile talent and capital put the City's status at risk. 'The financial industry is still driven by talent and capital formation. And those things are much more mobile than they were 25 years ago,' Solomon told The Master Investor Podcast. • Rachel Reeves refuses to rule out wealth tax despite fresh warnings Solomon is one of the world's most powerful investment bankers and has been chief executive of Goldman Sachs, which has about 6,000 employees in the UK, since 2018. He said he was 'encouraged by some of what the current government is talking about in terms of supporting business and trying to support a more growth-oriented agenda. But if you don't set a policy that keeps talent here, that encourages capital formation here, I think over time you risk that.' On July 15, Rachel Reeves unveiled a number of measures aimed at cutting red tape in Britain's financial services sector as part of attempts to kickstart the economy. The chancellor said in her Mansion House speech that Labour placed financial services, one of eight key growth sectors under the industrial strategy, 'at the heart of this government's growth mission'. However, there has been speculation the Treasury could target profits in the banking sector, which have been boosted by higher interest rates, with tax rises to help bolster the government's fiscal position. Reeves with Solomon and his Goldman Sachs co-CEOs Kunal Shah, left, and Anthony Gutman, right, in Wednesday's meeting SIMON WALKER/HM TREASURY Reeves is facing pressure over reforms to the non-dom tax regime, with research by New World Wealth, an intelligence firm, recently suggesting Britain has lost 18 billionaires over the past two years, more than any other country in the world. In the podcast, Solomon said: 'Incentives matter. If you create tax policy or incentives that push people away, you harm your economy.' Reeves also pledged in her speech last week to make 'meaningful reforms' to ringfencing, rules brought in following the 2008 financial crisis which forced lenders to legally separate their high street businesses from riskier investment banking divisions. • Why is the FTSE 100 so high when the UK economy is stuttering? Solomon pressed the chancellor, with whom he met in 11 Downing Street on Wednesday along with his co-CEOs Kunal Shah and Anthony Gutman, to 'follow through', saying: 'It's a place where the UK is an outlier, and by being an outlier, it prevents capital formation and growth. 'What's the justification for being an outlier? Why is this so difficult to change? It's hard to make a substantive policy argument that this is like a great policy for the UK. So why is it so hard to change?' The ringfencing regime has also faced criticism from the bosses of some of Britain's biggest banks, who called on the chancellor in April to abolish the rules, arguing that they were inefficient and had been superseded by other reforms.
Times
5 hours ago
- Times
Why would I want a wealth tax, Rachel Reeves, when I want to be rich?
The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has refused to rule out the prospect of a 'wealth tax', which, as I understand it, would affect those with more than £10 million in assets. That's loopy, to my mind. Or, to put it another way, if having more than £10 million is so spectacularly evil, why do I want £10 million (and rising) more than anything else on earth? It looks splendid. Indeed, as I would shout from my yacht, or house with circular drive: 'This is splendid! Highly recommend!' Obviously I wouldn't go on about no longer having to park on the straight drive otherwise known as 'the street'. I wouldn't wish to rub people's faces in it. I'm not a monster. And I've had many happy years parking on 'the street' where my car has either been nicked or gone over. • Rachel Reeves refuses to rule out wealth tax despite fresh warnings The last time it was gone over the perpetrator took a pair of Wellington boots but left a crack pipe behind on the back seat, so I think that made us even-stevens. But the bottom line is that those socialist types who argue that accruing vast wealth is somehow wrong are missing one important fact: I would really love it. 'I really love this!' I would also shout. 'Park wherever!' I may host a ball. I may host a party in Venice and annoy everyone who lives there. Why not? I'm rich. Although, essentially, I would stay the same. I would keep humble. My friends today, some of whom go way back, would stay my friends, until I dumped them. One would have to be choosy. My yacht, Princess Bora, won't be able to accommodate all and sundry. You can't have anyone and everyone turning up expecting to park on your circular drive. They're circular, circular drives, but not endless. And I would have to make space for Orlando Bloom and Tom Cruise and the Kardashians, who seem to turn up wherever any rich person is to be found, even though they don't go far back and barely know them. 'Orlando, Tom, Kim, park wherever!' It'll be epic. It will be terrific. Katy Perry, she'll be along, just you wait and see. I may even purchase a private island, bus other millionaires and billionaires out there, and fill it with sexual playthings. Why not? I'm rich. As for my family? Honestly, I don't know if they'd be up to it. It pains me to say it but it's true. We've not had a single 'rift' to date so are they even capable of a rift? I sometimes want to shake them while saying: 'What does one have to do to get a rift up and running around here?' Imagine how embarrassing it'll be mingling with the Beckhams, say, without a single rift to your name. I'd probably even decline David and Victoria's invitations because I wouldn't wish to turn up with no rift to give them. The shame that none of my kids has had the good sense to marry someone I don't like. So my family are an issue. I don't even know if they have it in them to tear each other's throats out over a will when I'm gone. How sad, to leave behind a family with nothing to tear each other'sthroats out for. Just an old car with an inherited crack pipe on the back seat. I can't bear the thought of it. Meanwhile, I may buy X and shout abuse day and night. Why not? I'm rich. People will want to hear the horrible things I have to say. This is why I don't have any truck with anyone who says wealth should be more evenly spread, because what they are not factoring in is how brilliant it would be if I had a decent chunk of it. And, having come from nothing, I do truly believe I'd stay grounded. I certainly wouldn't call upon my staff in the middle of the night unless it was an emergency and I felt like a small bowl of ice cream or a tickle. I would still come into the office once in a blue moon or possibly never. And it goes without saying I will inevitably pop up in that box at Wimbledon while those who can less afford it have to buy their tickets. Why not? I'm rich. Highly recommend. As it is my birthday next week I thought I'd release a video like the one released for Prince George's 12th birthday. He's a cutie, that little fella, but I am a cutie too, let's not forget. I think it's even why, the other day, a young woman offered me her seat on the bus. • Photo and video released for Prince George's 12th birthday This level of cuteness can't be left to stand, she was probably thinking. That video is lovely and mine will, I hope, be lovely too. I've yet to approach my siblings about walking across a sunny field in Norfolk hand-in-hand but I can't see why they'd demur. True, my brother, when we were little, would not hold any of his sisters' hands. Or, if he was forced to, would pull his jumper sleeve down so he wouldn't 'catch something'. I don't know how I'm going to talk him into a friendship bracelet. He'll just have to go with it. 'We need to look happy and natural,' I will tell him, while pulling up his jumper sleeve. I think he'll be into leaning on a rustic gate, though. My sister and I will, probably, be wearing very sweet cardigans that will instantly sell out. I do love the royal birthday video. It's an adorable way to give back to the public and, as you know, I'm all about giving back. I would give back the crack pipe if I knew whence it came. And we are all as cute as Prince Louis, that's for sure. It's the missing teeth.
