Show the Working

Set Business Tax Stability and Reform Business Rates

Labour · what the evidence says

An independent, source-checked look at Labour’s policy “Set Business Tax Stability and Reform Business Rates” — what it would actually do across the things that affect your life. Every claim below quotes the source behind it. How this works.

Public finances & the next generation — Little effect

minor · low confidence

This policy broadly maintains the existing tax baseline — the corporation tax cap locks in current rates, full expensing was already in place, and the business rates reform is designed to be revenue-neutral. The main fiscal concern is that locking in these commitments reduces the government's room to raise revenue if needed, but the policy itself does not add materially to the debt path.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether the business rates reform is genuinely revenue-neutral in practice, and whether full expensing's long-run GDP uplift is large enough to offset its near-term revenue cost.

Our reading: For O12, the core question is whether this policy moves the debt path materially — either by adding unfunded commitments or by improving long-run fiscal capacity through investment. On balance, the direct fiscal effect is close to neutral. The corporation tax cap does not cut rates below current levels; it simply forecloses future rises, so there is no revenue loss relative to current baseline. Full expensing was already in operation; its permanence (rather than temporary status) may have modest near-term revenue cost but the OBR and model projections suggest a positive long-run investment and GDP effect, which would improve the fiscal position over a longer horizon. The business rates reform is explicitly designed to be revenue-neutral, with lower multipliers for smaller properties funded by a higher multiplier on large ones and a transitional support package. The most credible concern for O12 is the IFS warning that locking in the corporation tax cap — combined with other commitments — materially reduces fiscal flexibility, leaving no headroom under the fiscal rules. This is a genuine constraint on the government's ability to respond to shocks, which is relevant to long-run debt-path sustainability. However, this effect is attributable to the broader tax lock across the manifesto; this single policy's marginal contribution to that constraint is limited. The £4.3 billion transitional support package introduces a modest near-term fiscal cost, but its absorption into the revenue-neutral design is plausible if the higher multiplier yields the projected revenue. Overall, the policy neither clearly improves nor clearly worsens the debt path — the near-term revenue neutrality and long-run investment uplift roughly offset the fiscal flexibility loss for this policy in isolation. Verdict: negligible effect on O12, with low confidence given genuine uncertainty about business rates fiscal neutrality and long-run investment elasticity.

Prosperity & living standards — Mixed picture

moderate · moderate confidence

Capping corporation tax and making full expensing permanent gives businesses certainty that should support investment and productivity over time, while business rates reform helps smaller firms but raises costs for larger ones. The net effect on living standards depends heavily on whether investment gains outweigh broader tax-burden pressures not addressed by this policy alone.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether the investment incentives from full expensing and rate certainty are large enough to offset the drag from the wider tax burden — including employer National Insurance rises — on business formation, productivity, and real wages.

Our reading: This policy bundles three instruments: a corporation tax ceiling, permanent full expensing, and business rates reform. On O13 — real living standards, productivity, investment, and economic opportunity — the direction is mixed with moderate magnitude over the long term. The investment case is strongest for full expensing. The OBR projected a 3.5% boost to business investment in the first two years, and independent modelling (Tax Foundation/CPS) projects long-run GDP gains of 0.9% and wage gains of 0.8% if the policy is sustained. These are projected figures but rest on credible institutional modelling. The permanence element matters: unlike temporary reliefs, a durable commitment changes business planning horizons, which is where the productivity payoff lies. The corporation tax cap at 25% offers certainty, which business groups acknowledge. However, the rate sits above the OECD average of ~21%, meaning the UK's relative competitive position is not improved — it is merely not worsened further. The cap benefits only the ~10% of businesses paying the main rate. Business rates reform redistributes between firm sizes. Smaller and high-street businesses gain meaningfully (up to 40% off rates for 250,000 small businesses; occupancy research supports a real effect on dynamism). But the revenue-neutral design shifts costs to large-property businesses, with a new high-value multiplier that analysts warn could force closures among larger operators. This is a genuine offset to the aggregate prosperity gain. The critical counterfactual gap: this policy is silent on the wider employer National Insurance increases that business groups and the IFS identify as constraining investment confidence and fiscal room. The policy's own instruments point modestly positive on investment and productivity, but the broader environment — higher aggregate tax burden, constrained public investment — limits how far these gains translate to population-scale living standards improvements. Mixed verdict reflects real gains for SMEs and investment incentives alongside genuine offsets for larger firms and an above-OECD-average headline rate.

Cost of living — Mixed picture

minor · low confidence

This policy mainly affects businesses rather than households directly, so any cost-of-living effect is indirect and uncertain. Business rates cuts for small shops could help keep high streets open and prices competitive, but a transition that cuts existing retail relief sharply could squeeze smaller retailers' margins and be passed on to shoppers.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether business rate savings are passed through to consumers as lower prices, or absorbed as profit or offset by rising rents.

Our reading: The policy's effects on cost of living are indirect and operate through two channels. First, the business tax stability measures (corporation tax cap, full expensing, AIA) primarily affect the roughly 10% of businesses that pay the full 25% rate. The OBR projects a modest investment boost from full expensing, and modelling suggests this could feed through to wages (estimated +0.8%) in the long run — a slow, diffuse benefit to household incomes. However, the UK rate remains above the OECD average, limiting any competitiveness dividend. Second, the business rates reform is more directly relevant to cost of living via the high street. Lower rates for retail, hospitality and leisure could help more small shops remain viable, improving access to everyday goods and services. Evidence shows small reductions in rates meaningfully raise the probability of a property being occupied. However, the transition is sharp: the existing 75% RHL relief falls to 40% in 2025/26 before the new permanent lower rates kick in from April 2026, creating a squeeze period for smaller retailers that could squeeze margins and potentially raise prices. The partial rent-capture effect (up to £0.32 per £1 of rate saving) further erodes the pass-through benefit to consumers. Taken together, the policy offers modest long-run upside for household wages and high street viability, but no immediate relief on food, energy or bills. The transition period creates a near-term risk of worsened margins for the small retailers households rely on. This makes the verdict genuinely mixed at minor magnitude — real channels both ways, but neither is large or fast-acting enough to be decisive for ordinary households' cost of living.

Good work & fair pay — Mixed picture

moderate · moderate confidence

Capping corporation tax, maintaining full expensing, and reforming business rates should support business investment and job quality for most workers — but higher levies on large properties and broader tax rises may squeeze some employers, putting jobs and wages at risk. The net effect on workers depends heavily on whether investment gains outweigh hiring costs.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether the investment boost from tax certainty and full expensing translates into higher wages and job quality, or is offset by employer cost pressures from other tax rises (especially National Insurance) running alongside this policy.

Our reading: The policy has two channels relevant to O4. First, tax stability (25% cap) and investment incentives (full expensing, AIA) are projected to raise business investment, and modelling suggests this could feed through to higher wages and better jobs over the parliament's lifespan. The OBR's 3.5% investment boost and Tax Foundation/CPS wage projections of +0.8% are non-trivial, and permanence matters — uncertainty had previously deterred long-run capital commitments. Second, business rates reform plausibly supports employment in retail, hospitality and leisure — sectors with large numbers of lower-paid workers — by cutting costs for smaller premises and reducing vacancy, directly relevant to job creation and security in those sectors. However, genuine downsides exist. Large-property employers face materially higher rates, and the CBI's survey data (two-thirds reporting budget hurt investment, half reporting it would hurt jobs) reflects employer sentiment about the broader tax package of which this policy is part. Critically, this policy sits alongside National Insurance rises not covered here, and business leaders' warnings about the combined burden are plausibly connected to labour-market effects. The rent pass-through risk (E30) is a minor offset to RHL relief gains. On balance, the direct provisions of this policy — stable corporation tax, investment allowances, targeted rates relief for small and mid-sized businesses — are modestly positive for workers, especially in SMEs and high-street sectors. The large-property multiplier introduces a real downside for some workers in those businesses. The verdict is mixed at moderate magnitude: genuine upsides and genuine downsides both grounded in cited evidence, with the dominant uncertainty being whether investment gains outpace employer cost pressures from the wider tax environment.

Compare all parties on public finances & the next generation →Compare all parties on prosperity & living standards →Compare all parties on cost of living →Compare all parties on good work & fair pay →Open this in the interactive comparison →← Show the Working home