2011 Budget documents
On this page you can download the 2011 Budget document; either as a complete PDF or in individual chapters. Supplementary documents are also available for download below.
The Budget Report and supplementary documents are available in Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format (PDF). If you do not have Adobe Acrobat installed on your computer you can download the software free of charge from the Adobe website. For alternative ways to read PDF documents and further information on website accessibility visit the HM Treasury accessibility page.
2011 Budget document
- 2011 Budget complete document (PDF 1.1MB) ** This is commonly referred to as "The Red Book" **
- Chapter 1 (PDF 288KB)
- Chapter 2 (PDF 284KB)
- Annex A (PDF 112KB)
- Annex B (PDF 62KB)
- Annex C (PDF 145MB)
- List of abbreviations, charts and tables (PDF 51KB)
Supplementary documents
PDF version
The government’s decision not to go ahead with key new anti-discrimination laws is another serious attack on disability rights, say campaigners.
The chancellor, George Osborne, announced in his budget speech that the government would not be introducing the “costly” dual discrimination rules that were set to be introduced through Labour’s Equality Act.
The clauses would have allowed employees – such as disabled women or gay disabled men – to bring claims of direct discrimination on the basis that their employers had treated them less favourably because of a combination of two “protected characteristics”, such as disability, race, age or gender.
Osborne said the announcement was part of the government’s “Plan for Growth”, which he claimed would save £350 million through a bonfire of regulations.
A Government Equalities Office (GEO) spokesman said that not introducing dual discrimination would save businesses £3 million a year, which he claimed would have been the cost of familiarising themselves with the new law.
When asked whether the government would consider implementing the measure in the future, the GEO spokesman declined to comment.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said it was concerned by the announcement and suggested it was more likely to increase costs for business.
An EHRC spokeswoman said: “We think having the dual discrimination measures is actually quite practical.”
She said Osborne’s announcement did not make much sense as a cost-cutting measure as some businesses might now “have to fight two separate cases rather than one” – one for each protected characteristic – so enacting the dual discrimination measure would also “free up” the time of tribunals.
Anne Kane, policy manager for Inclusion London, said the announcement was “very disappointing”, and added: “Along with their proposals to further weaken the public sector specific duties, it is an indication of the government’s strong wish to weaken equality and anti-discrimination law, which threatens very bad outcomes for disabled people and comes along at the point of the worst spending cuts in the post-war period.”
Richard Hawkes, chief executive of the disability charity Scope, said the move was “undermining the Equality Act” and demonstrated “questionable support of disabled people in employment and in everyday life”.
As part of its Plan for Growth, the government also said it would clarify the tax and employment rights and responsibilities of disabled people and other service-users who receive direct payments.
And it pledged to improve the take-up of assisted living technology, by investing £18 million in developing new products, working with the industry to reduce prices, and helping develop a code of practice to increase confidence in the technology among disabled and older customers.
Poverty projections between 2010-11 and 2013-14: a post-Budget 2011 update
This note provides projections of relative and absolute income poverty among children and working-age adults in the UK for each year between 2010-11 and 2013-14. This constitutes an update of IFS projections published in December 2010 . Readers interested in the methods and assumptions used should refer to Section 2 of that Briefing Note. The updated results are very similar to the original ones, and all the main qualitative conclusions are unchanged, so the results are not discussed in any detail here.
A financial education charity says tax and benefit changes coming into force in the coming week will leave households £200 worse off.
They include a one percentage point rise in the charge for National Insurance and a lower threshold at which the higher rate of tax applies.
Credit Action says of the 44 changes to both systems only 13 will have a positive impact.
It says 26 of the changes will have a negative impact on people's pockets.
The other changes, it says, will have a mixed effect on household income.
One of the biggest moves announced in the March Budget brought the level of income which people start to pay the 40% higher rate tax down to £42,475.
The well-respected independent Institute for Fiscal Studies estimated that would bring an extra 750,000 people into the upper tax band for the first time.
Set against that is that raising of the limit at which any income tax is levied by £1,000 to £7,475.
That will mean 500,000 people will be lifted out of paying income tax altogether.
Up and down
The main rate at which National Insurance is paid is being increased from 11% to 12% from the start of the new tax year, but again, the level at which the payments begin has been lifted from £110 to £139.
Added together, the changes to the income tax and National Insurance system will help low earners, leaving someone on £7,475 a year £275 better off.
People on £35,000 will not see any change to the amount of tax and National Insurance they pay.
The biggest losers will be those earning more than £35,000, with someone on £50,000 seeing their take-home pay reduced by £500 a year, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Wide-ranging changes to the tax credits and benefits system include a freezing in the rate at which child benefit is paid for three years, something that means inflation will erode its worth in that time.
Benefits and pensions in future will increase in line with the inflation as measured by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI), rather than the Retail Prices Index (RPI), which tends to be higher.
CPI was running at 3.1% in September, the month that benefit increases are based on, while RPI was considerably higher at 4.8%.
Changes being made to the working tax credit, the local housing allowance, and one of the winter fuel allowance will also negatively affect people's income.
Plans to reform the state pension will be unveiled in the coming week - with a new flat-rate scheme to start in 2015 or 2016.
The flat-rate pension could be worth at least £155 for new pensioners, meaning most people will have a higher guaranteed non-means tested benefits thank is current.
Also beginning this week, around half a million Incapacity Benefit claimants could find themselves declared fit for work after a re-assessment of their health.
Trials of compulsory health checks for claimants in two parts of the country have found about a third of those tested were deemed to be able to work.
The mental health charity, MIND, has criticised the new Work Capability Assessment (WCA), calling it not fit for purpose.
It surveyed more than 300 people currently claiming the benefit and found 75% said concern about the WCA had made their mental health worse.
The Commons Treasury Committee publishes its assessment of the Budget 2011. The report looks at the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), tax, the plan for growth and advance budget briefing.
- Report - Budget 2011
- Budget 2011 inquiry page
- Commons News: Budget 2011 statement
- Commons news: Budget debate
- Treasury Committee
Office for Budget Responsibility
The report looks at the way the OBR has functioned in this, the first Budget since it was permanently established. It raises concerns about the timetable for the economic forecast, noting:
the timetable agreed for this forecast and Budget required all decisions which would impact on the economic forecast to be made at least a fortnight before Budget day. We recommend that the timetable should be revisited to provide more flexibility enabling economic shocks and late political decisions to be accommodated. It is understandable that a number of adjustments to the process and timetable will be needed, given that this was the first full forecast cycle since the creation of the OBR.
Committee Chair, Andrew Tyrie MP commented:
"It would be concerning if the construction of Budgets was prejudiced by an arbitrarily tight timetable. The OBR and the Treasury need to sort this out."
The committee was also concerned that decisions on whether potential privatisation receipts should be included could affect the reliability of the forecast, saying:
We urge the OBR to reconsider the way in which asset sales are treated both in the Economic and Fiscal Outlook and in the forthcoming sustainability report. All economic forecasts deal with a number of specific and very uncertain outcomes to which numbers or assumptions are attached in the forecast. Asset sales are no different from many of these. (Paragraph 180)
Committee Chair, Andrew Tyrie MP commented:
"We are concerned that caution in the treatment of asset sales may lead to a bias in the central forecast. A forecast is no longer central if decisions are made which have the effect of entrenching 'upside risk'."
The committee continues to press for a full review of the OBR, including its powers, remit and relationship to Parliament, saying:
We welcome the provision for independent review of the reports from the Office for Budget Responsibility, and may well engage with the Non-Executive directors on the arrangements for those reviews. However, we continue to believe there is a need for a fundamental review of the Office for Budget Responsibility, which would not be confined to assessing the output of the new organisation, but which would consider whether the framework established by the Budget Responsibility and National Audit Act was the most appropriate one. A wide ranging review of the OBR is essential. There is, of course, no need for such a review to be statutory. (Paragraph 185)
Committee Chair, Andrew Tyrie MP commented:
"The committee was pleased that the Chancellor has agreed in principle to independent review of the OBR after 5 years, albeit at a late stage. The committee expects to be involved in the review in due course, which will need to consider whether the OBR has the right structure."
Tax
The committee repeated its call for gradual reform of the tax regime in line with the principles of certainty, stability and simplicity identified in its recent report: Principles of tax policy.
The committee said:
The Budget may not lead to a net simplification in tax law—although this is difficult to quantify. We recognise that it is very difficult to simplify an already complex system and welcome the work of the Office of Tax Simplification and the establishment of a 'direction of travel' towards simplification. (Paragraph 131)
Treasury Committee Chair Andrew Tyrie MP said:
"Tax reform cannot be achieved overnight. We welcome the Government’s intentions. To some degree, tax simplification is measureable; we intend to monitor it closely and also to monitor the extent to which the Treasury reforms the tax system in accordance with the principles established in the Treasury Committee's report."
The committee also noted the Government's decision to increase the supplementary rate of corporation tax on the oil and gas industry by 12 percentage points in the Budget —less than a year after promising to provide a stable tax regime in the sector —might weaken the Government’s credibility in seeking to establish a stable tax regime.
The Plan for Growth
The Committee was pleased with the further reduction in corporation tax announced in the Budget. It considered that this was a positive measure aimed at boosting growth. The report said:
We welcome the reduction in the headline rate of corporation tax and note the evidence provided that this has boosted business growth and tax revenues elsewhere. We will monitor closely the impact of this policy on corporation tax revenues in the UK. (Paragraph 81)
The committee urged the Government to monitor the effect of the FirstBuy scheme on the supply of additional housing. The scheme should—along with reforms to the planning system—increase the supply of new houses. It was important for the housing market that it did so.
On Enterprise Zones the report says:
Enterprise Zones may have some effect in reviving particular areas, but we note that almost all the evidence received is unsure about the extent to which they will contribute to UK growth. It is clear that there is still much to be done on the details of this policy. (Paragraph 93)
The plan to boost micro businesses and start-ups by a moratorium on new domestic regulation is intended to reduce the burdens on business. The committee has taken limited evidence on this. We have however received evidence that the proposal may create problems. Several lists of regulatory exceptions and some administrative complexity could however be created by this apparently attractive proposal. (Paragraph 106)
Treasury Committee Chair Andrew Tyrie MP said:
"The Government has made a start with the plan for growth. The crucial task is to ensure that the full effects of specific and detailed measures are carefully monitored."
Advance Budget briefing
The report notes that successive Governments appear to have briefed in advance of the Budget. The report says:
It has been noticeable over many years under successive Governments that measures appear to have been trailed, sometimes accurately, sometimes in a way designed to place them in the most favourable light. (Paragraph 4)
Treasury Committee Chair, Andrew Tyrie MP said:
"The committee's conclusion about the apparent trailing of budget measures by successive administrations speaks for itself."
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-sele...
Most of the direct benefit announcements in the budget follow on from previous announcements and follow the plans for savings made in the Comprehensive Spending Review and thereafter the Welfare Reform Bill 2011.
Confirmation of the long term JSA clamaints not loosing 10% of there Housing benefit after one year.
DLA Mobility Component has a very temporary repreve until 2013/14 as part of the wider reform to DLA and introduction of Personal Independence Payment (PIP).
Those who may rely on Support for Mortgage Interest (SMI) see the waiting time of 13 weeks maintained for one year from January 2012 (ends Jan 2013).
There are Pension changes and the proposal to introduce/reform the state pension. If you have a pension please read the 2011 Budget complete document - this is also commonly referred to as The Red Book.
Similarly if you have children there are changes being introduced here.
I will continue to review the Red Book and post accordingly.