A red card for the Chancellor? Ex-footballer Gary Neville blasts Rachel Reeves' tax hike on businesses
The ex-England and Manchester United footballer hit out at Chancellor Rachel Reeves for increasing employers' National Insurance contributions.
Neville, who is now a business owner and TV pundit, claimed the tax hike announced by Ms Reeves at last year's Budget 'probably could have been held back'.
The criticism will sting both Ms Reeves and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, following Neville's staunch support for Labour at the general election.
The former defender told Sky News: 'I honestly don't believe that, to be fair, companies and small businesses should be deterred from employing people.
'So, I think the National Insurance rise was one that I feel probably could have been held back, particularly in terms of the way in which the economy was.'
Neville also warned about the impact of a double whammy for under-pressure businesses at the start of April.
This is when both the National Insurance rise and Labour's increase in the minimum wage came into effect, both of which hiked costs for firms.
Neville said: 'I don't think we can ever criticise the Government for increasing the minimum wage.
'I honestly believe that people, to be fair, should be paid more so I don't think that's something that you can be critical of.
'I do think that the National Insurance rise, though, was a challenge.'
A recent report found nearly 50,000 UK companies are on the brink of collapse as rising wage costs, due to Budget measures, put small firms under 'immense strain'.
The latest Begbies Traynor red flag alert found that firms in critical financial distress rose by more than a fifth (21.4 per cent) year-on-year to 49,309 in the second quarter.
Consumer-facing industries saw some of the most 'extreme' rises in critical financial distress, with a 41.7 per cent surge among bars and restaurants, a 39 per cent leap for travel and tourism and 17.8 per cent jump for general retailers.
Begbies warned that many independent pubs will not have the scale to withstand the pressures for another year without action.
Ric Traynor, executive chairman of Begbies Traynor, said: 'The sharp rise in critical distress underscores just how tough the economic environment is for UK businesses and it's abundantly clear that tens of thousands of firms are struggling to stay afloat.
'Small and medium sized businesses across the UK are being put under immense strain by the recent increases to employer's NI as well as the increase to the national minimum wage.
'With limited financial headroom to absorb rising costs, many businesses are now reaching a tipping point.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
Doomed 105-year-old football club could go out of business in days
Morecambe Football Club faces imminent closure, with prospective buyers stating it will go out of business on Monday without immediate action. Panjab Warriors, the prospective buyers, have urged current owner Jason Whittingham to sign the deal to allow the takeover to proceed and save the club. The club's academy is set to cease operations by the end of the week, and the first team has already halted activities due to lapsed insurance. Morecambe's membership with the National League has been suspended, and the club remains under embargo ahead of the upcoming season. Panjab Warriors, supported by a minority shareholders action group, are ready to complete the acquisition to preserve the club's 105-year legacy.
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Is this tough US-EU trade deal a triumph for Brexit Britain? Only in leavers' most delusional fantasies
Those who misled the country over Brexit are usually quieter these days. They do not hang their heads in shame, but change the subject whenever they can. They deflect with their new war-cry that Britain must also leave the European convention on human rights. As the effects of their wicked Brexit folly worsen by the month, they rarely get a chance to whoop: 'We were right!' So their glee was unrestrained when the great US global bully gave Britain a less hard beating with a 10% tariff on its goods, compared with the EU, which was walloped with 15%. Their joy overflowed when the business and trade secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, conceded: 'I'm absolutely clear, this is a benefit of being out of the European Union, having our independent trade policy, absolutely no doubt about that.' But what else can a trade secretary, speaking through gritted teeth, actually say? In his attempts to attract foreign investment, he can hardly tell the truth about the damage done by leaving the EU. These advocates of Brexit should gloat while they can. When the French prime minister called the EU's deal with Donald Trump a 'soumission' (submission), Kwasi Kwarteng seized on the word in a piece for the Telegraph, writing: 'For the French, with their memories of capitulation to the Nazis in 1940, the word is even more associated with abject humiliation than it is in English.' Yes, that's the same Kwarteng who hurled the British economy over a cliff only three years ago. 'This trade deal is the EU's greatest humiliation since Britain voted to leave', read the headline on his column. But he would never confess that the difference between a 10% and 15% tariff with the US is minimal, since we trade twice as much with the EU as the US. It barely equates to the regular variation in exchange rates: in other words, it's 'a rounding error', the Centre for European Reform's trade expert, John Springford, told me, when compared with the hammer blow Britain gave itself with Brexit. The UK-India trade deal signed with the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, last week was greeted with another Brexiter whoop from the Conservative peer Daniel Hannan. Also writing in the Telegraph, he said: 'My party, and Brexiteers more widely, should be taking credit for having done what all the clever Europhiles have spent six years telling us was impossible. Instead of moaning, we should welcome Starmer's belated understanding that world's biggest and fastest-growing markets are outside the EU.' But the Tory leader took another view: 'Keir Starmer called this 'historic.' It's not historic, we've just been shafted!' Kemi Badenoch said, dismissing the India agreement as a bad deal that would increase immigration. I don't know whether clever men like Kwarteng and Hannan are blinded by Brexit monomania or paralysed by the awful knowledge of the damage they have inflicted on their country, unable to confess an act of treachery and delusion hardly matched in British history. But as ever, facts are too inconvenient for them to deal with. Yes, the India deal is the biggest and most substantial trade deal since leaving the EU. Yes, it's a deal that would have been impossible to do from inside the union. But how big is it? It will add 0.13% to our economy. That's better than the Australia agreement, worth just 0.08%, the New Zealand deal, worth 0.03%, or the proposed US agreement, worth 0.16%, according to Department for Business and Trade analysis. But our fragile economy needs all the help it can get, so hurrah for Brexit and our new trade deals! But the gloaters ignore the context: our great Brexit losses. Here's the Office for Budget Responsibility's assessment: 'Our forecasts have assumed that the volume of UK imports and exports will both be 15% lower than if we had remained in the EU.' That 15% loss in trade 'will lead to a 4% reduction in the potential productivity of the UK economy'. In other words, as Jonty Bloom of the New World calculates, we need 50 India trade deals to make up for Brexit, because Britain does more than 40% of its trade with the EU – more if you include the European Economic Area and Switzerland. India has just 2% of our trade. Brexiters bleat that Labour is sneaking us into the EU by the back door, with deals on Horizon, the EU's research and innovation funding programme; soon, hopefully, Erasmus; and maybe a youth experience scheme. We hope for agricultural products and energy deals. But even these, say the trade experts, are still small potatoes. Major attempts to rescue Britain's 4% loss in productivity since 2020 hit the concrete walls of Boris Johnson's monumentally bad trade and cooperation agreement. Brexit zealots protest against agreements to keep a dynamic alignment with EU standards that would make trade easier. But it doesn't apply to our internal environmental standards: outside EU rules, we have let our water quality fall behind the EU. More than 85% of bathing waters in the EU are rated excellent compared with just 64% in the UK, with the gap rising every year, reports the European Movement. Public opinion has shifted rapidly: we are now a 'Bregretful' country, where only 31% still think it was right to leave and 61% say Brexit has been more of a failure than a success. Who do they blame? The Conservatives and Boris Johnson are top of the list, with 88% and 84% respectively holding them responsible. More than two-thirds (67%) blame Nigel Farage. A majority of Britons (56%) want to rejoin the EU as the grim reaper carries off old Brexiters, replacing them with young, pro-European voters. Don't expect bolder moves from the Labour government in its current frame of mind. Though defence and security draw us towards ever closer union, public opinion is not to be trusted. If people were confronted now with actual re-entry terms – paying in, free movement, joining the euro, no special deals – their answers might change. The mood might also be different if the far right continues its gains in EU countries, dividing the union's values. What might it take to throw off the economic, political and psychological darkness of Brexit? A clever – or Cleverly? – new Tory leader daring to break with the past, confessing the error of Brexit and taking us back into the EU, once and for all. It may take another generation to recover. Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist
Times
22 minutes ago
- Times
Whatever Keir Starmer says, Heathrow's third runway is a folly
F or a flight to nowhere, at least it's a popular one. Heathrow's third runway is back on the radar again: a reheated version of its pre-Covid plan, only this time with a jumbo £49 billion price tag. It's got a political tailwind, too, with the PM saying he'll do 'whatever it takes' to get 'spades in the ground' by 2030 and Rachel Reeves bizarrely making it her No 1 growth project. Yet there are good reasons Britain has been failing to build this landing strip since 1968. And none of them have gone away, whatever the breezy assurances of the Heathrow boss Thomas Woldbye: the fellow who was famously sparko when the North Hyde substation fire shut the airport. In fact, some have got trickier. Back then, no one was contending with 'net zero' or the joys of the M25 — least of all putting all 12 lanes in a tunnel and having the planes land on top.
