Blog

There can be no doubt that spending on working-age benefits is out of control. Over the past decade alone, spending on Housing Benefit has increased from about £16 billion to £25 billion (in current prices), whilst spending on tax credits has increased from £17 billion to £28 billion. This is an upward trend which goes back to well before the Great Recession.

Right from the start, Chancellor George Osborne's response to runaway welfare spending has been to leave the structure of income transfer programmes largely unchanged, and to realise savings by randomly chopping off bits and pieces here and there. This was already apparent in the 2010 Budget and the Comprehensive Spending Review, where the majority of cuts came from fiddling with the uprating formulas: child benefit and some tax credit elements were temporarily frozen, while benefits that had previously been uprated in line with the Retail Prices Index were pegged to the (generally lower) Consumer Price Index instead.

Back then, one could have justified these steps as first-aid measures; not visionary, but perhaps necessary to gain some breathing space for devising a more systematic plan. But no such systematic plan ever came. Four years on, Osborne's announcements at the Conservative Party Conference are a continuation of his standard 'Edward Scissorhands' approach of random cuts. Working-age benefits will now be frozen for two years, a measure which follows an earlier 1 per cent uprating cap from 2012. This is a way of cutting 'by stealth', i.e. letting inflation do the job that Osborne and his colleagues should be doing.

A more strategic approach would have begun by analysing why welfare spending has risen so inexorably in the first place. Take housing benefit (HB). The reason why HB has risen to such astronomical levels is that in most parts of the UK, rents have risen to astronomical levels, and until recently, housing benefit rates have been pegged to rents. The explosion in rents, meanwhile, is simply a reflection of the general explosion of house prices, which is a consequence of the UK's excessively restrictive planning system and the inability of the political class to stand up to NIMBY interests. According to the latest estimate, by the LSE's Christian Hilber and Wouter Vermeulen, planning constraints are responsible for more than a third of the price of a house. This is almost certainly an underestimate, because the authors define 'planning constraints' in a very cautious way.

Thus, if the government had the courage to ease planning restrictions (e.g. roll back the green belt) and put the NIMBYs in their place, house prices and rents could tumble by at least a third. The cost of HB would then automatically fall as well. Compared to a simple freeze, this approach would have countless other advantages as well. It would also benefit those who earn just a little bit too much to qualify for housing benefit, but who still struggle with their housing costs. And making the private rental sector more widely accessible would take pressure off the social housing sector, such that its subsidies could be reduced commensurately.

Tax credits also require a much more systematic overhaul, not just an arbitrary freeze. Tax credits were initially meant to be a wage supplement, but they have increasingly become a wage substitute for people who work part-time, or not at all. The solution is to get work incentives right. Tax credit recipients who increase their working hours - say, from a two-day to a four-day workweek - are effectively facing a marginal tax rate of 73 per cent, due to the combination of tax credit withdrawal, income tax and national insurance contributions. Increasing their gross earnings by say £50 per week would only leave them £13.50 better off. This could be ameliorated by disentangling tax credit entitlement from income tax (and NI) liability, i.e. converting tax credits into a 'negative income tax'. People would then be either tax-credit recipients or income-tax payers, but never both at the same time. Also, for part-time employees, receipt of tax credits could be coupled with a requirement to increase working hours over time, to something eventually approaching full-time employment. This would mean a time limit to part-time tax credits. Ideally, tax credit reform would be combined with the rolling out of a locally funded 'workfare' scheme, comparable to the system that drove down welfare dependency in Wisconsin.

Osborne's unsystematic lawnmower cuts have not delivered a lot even on their own terms, because they have failed to address the reasons for the prior spending escalation. Instead, strengthening work incentives and ensuring that basic essentials like housing are easily affordable would greatly reduce the need for welfare spending. Welfare spending would then fall automatically and permanently. The most intelligent 'cuts' are those that begin by making spending less necessary.

This article was originally published by the Huffington Post UK.

Comments (1)
HB is a State subsidy to landlords. Not only does this raise rents, but by increasing the margins for landlords, it allows them to out compete first time buyers in the housing market. Like all State subsidies HB should be scrapped. Do we really need to be giving landlords tens of billions in free cash? Of course HB is small fry to the biggest subsidy to landlords and landowners, capitalised land rent. £200bn per year worth of free lunch. Get rid of that huge distortion, the "housing crisis" sorts itself out, without adding to our oversupplied and inefficient property market. Or the need for Greenbelt restrictions to contain the urban sprawl capitalised rent causes. Free market capitalism works better than protected State privileges and subsidies. Odd how the IEA keep espousing the latter.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.

As in all IEA publications, the views expressed in this blog are those of the authors and not those of the Institute (which has no corporate view), its managing trustees, Academic Advisory Council or senior staff.

Previous blog posts

Search

Kristian Niemietz
29 September 2014
7 comments

In a more rational world, planning reform would not be a tribal issue. It would, on the contrary, be an issue around which people from all major political camps could coalesce. Albeit for different...
Glynn Brailsford
26 September 2014
9 comments

Tax is the single biggest area of expenditure for low-income groups and indirect taxes in particular are a major cause of Britain’s cost of living crisis. Despite significantly lower rates of...
Ryan Bourne
25 September 2014
comments

Earlier this week, I outlined the red herrings that distort the debate about low pay and the cost of living. These create an environment for politicians to advocate economically damaging...
Geoffrey E. Wood
24 September 2014
1 comment

We often hear when a group of lower-paid workers goes on strike that they ‘deserve more’, that they ‘need a living wage’. There is now something called the ‘London...
Mark Littlewood
23 September 2014
1 comment

If necessity is the mother of invention, politicians of all stripes will have to be spectacularly inventive in dealing with the fallout from the Scottish referendum result. And we may yet stumble...
Ryan Bourne
22 September 2014
comments

Since the publication of Kristian Niemietz’s seminal work Redefining the Poverty Debate in 2012, many of us have been arguing for a new approach to the perceived problem of poverty and low pay...
Mark Littlewood
21 September 2014
comments

In this new video for ieaTV, IEA Director General Mark Littlewood explains how liberalising the UK’s suffocating planning laws would have a profound and beneficial effect on the cost of living...
Philip Booth
19 September 2014
1 comment

In denying the Scots the option of devo-max, David Cameron made arguably the most monumental mistake of any recent premiership. The fairly narrow ‘no’ vote could lead to the worst...
Len Shackleton
18 September 2014
5 comments

Greg Dyke, the Chairman of the Football Association, is proposing a new set of rules about the eligibility of non-EU footballers for work visas. The proposals, which would aim to reduce the...
Ryan Bourne
17 September 2014
comments

With low productivity, high inflation and terrible industrial relations, in 1977, Britain was a basket case. So that year, businessman John Hoskyns decided to dedicate substantial effort to analysing...
Christopher Snowdon
16 September 2014
1 comment

The economist Julian Simon once wrote that ‘the economic study of advertising is not deserving of great attention’, ruefully adding that ‘this is not a congenial point at which to...
Ryan Bourne
14 September 2014
comments

Most politicians and commentators think the ‘cost of living’ and its inverse ‘low pay’ are areas of serious concern for public policy. But for some, like the journalist Owen...
Ryan Bourne
12 September 2014
5 comments

Concern about ‘low pay’ and the ‘cost of living’ are two sides of the same coin. Pay is deemed ‘low’ when the prices of things we need to buy are rising...
Kristian Niemietz
11 September 2014
1 comment

In this video the IEA’s Senior Research Fellow Kristian Niemietz outlines a free-market approach to the cost of living squeeze. Building on his research in Redefining the Poverty Debate, he...
Andreas Strongolou
10 September 2014
1 comment

Planning controls constitute a significant denial of private property rights, with serious economic consequences. The most obvious is the severe housing crisis. However, businesses also suffer as...
Ryan Bourne
9 September 2014
comments

Why do politicians advocate policies which deal with the symptoms of problems rather than the underlying issues directly? In the past week we’ve seen Liberal Democrats react to expensive...
Christopher Snowdon
8 September 2014
15 comments

Owen Jones’ new book, The Establishment, promises to be more than your average left-wing polemic against austerity, banksters, globalisation and ConDems. The blurb promotes it as an expos...
Ryan Bourne
7 September 2014
2 comments

Today marks the start of the IEA’s ‘Cutting the UK's Cost of Living’ month as part of our 2020 Vision programme – an attempt to shine a light on key issues which we...
Matt Ridley
5 September 2014
comments

In this interview for ieaTV, Matt Ridley explains that shale gas is readily available in the UK and can be extracted relatively cheaply. Moreover, the environmental problems associated with the...