What does the pledge mean? 

In its manifesto the Labour party committed to “not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase National Insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of Income Tax, or VAT”. (We have looked at the specific elements of the end of this sentence separately—see our assessment of its pledges on National Insurance, income tax rates and VAT—but this page looks at the overall commitment to “not increase taxes on working people”.)

Labour’s manifesto did not specify what exactly it meant by the phrase “working people”, and this has caused much confusion and controversy over what the commitment actually meant. 

This was the case even before the election, when Labour failed to offer a clear and comprehensive definition of what it meant by the term, and it’s become even more of an issue in the run-up to and aftermath of Labour’s first Budget. 

Various senior Labour politicians have offered definitions of what the manifesto meant by “working people”. 

During the election campaign, Rachel Reeves (now Chancellor of the Exchequer) said working people “are people who get their income from going out to work everyday, and also pensioners that have worked all their lives and are now in retirement, drawing down on their pensions”. 

Shortly before the Autumn Budget Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said he defined a “working person” as someone who “goes out and earns their living, usually paid in a sort of monthly cheque” and who can’t “write a cheque to get out of difficulties”. He also said someone whose income came primarily from assets would not meet his definition, but that some with a small amount in savings or stocks and shares would not be excluded.

Other government ministers have said Labour’s pledge meant it would not increase taxes seen in people’s payslips. The Treasury also referred to not increasing taxes in people’s payslips when we asked for its definition of “working people” in November 2024.

The manifesto’s failure to define what is clearly an ambiguous term isn’t good enough—as we’ve written elsewhere, commitments that are subject to interpretation are at best a recipe for confusion, and risk fuelling cynicism among voters. As we set out in our manifesto standards ahead of the election, manifestos should define things clearly and consistently and be phrased in a way that a reasonable person is likely to understand.

While exactly who this pledge was originally intended to refer to is unclear, there seems to be a clear timescale implied. We’ve assumed it commits the government to not increasing taxes on working people until the next election.

What progress has been made?

Assessing progress on this pledge is difficult given the uncertainty over its meaning, and for that reason we’ve rated it “Unclear or disputed”.

If we were to assume a very literal definition of the phrase “working people”, then the government would have clearly failed to meet its pledge, as the recent Budget increased taxes in a number of ways that affect people who work—for example, a rise in the rate at which Capital Gains Tax is charged could mean some people who work, but also make money from selling assets, pay more.

If we were to accept the government’s current framing of the commitment as applying only to taxes in people’s payslips, then the government would appear to have met its pledge so far. The recent Budget did not increase employee National Insurance contributions or income tax rates—the two main taxes levied directly on earnings.

The Office for Budget Responsibility has forecast that the majority of an announced increase in employers’ National Insurance contributions will be passed on to employees through lower wages, but this is not the same as directly increasing taxes on employees.

However, as noted above, the lack of a clear definition makes it difficult for us to give any meaningful verdict on this pledge.