Plans to raise the level of National Insurance paid by employers has been dubbed a "tax on jobs".
It is feared the move reportedly being considered by Chancellor Rachel Reeves would lead to firms hiring fewer people, derail investment and impact pensions.
Analysts and experts have raised concerns ahead of the much-anticipated first Budget of the new Labour UK Government that is expected on October 30.
What is National Insurance?
National Insurance contributions are the UK’s second-biggest revenue stream behind income tax, and the Institute for Fiscal Studies said it is expected to raise just under £170 billion in 2024/25, which is about a sixth of all tax revenue.
Who pays?
National Insurance is paid by employees and the self-employed on earnings, and by employers on the earnings of those they employ. Employers currently pay National Insurance of 13.8% on all earnings above £175 per week.
What are the concerns?
An increase in National Insurance contributions for employers could harm Labour's aims to increase the number of people in work and improve workers’ finances, said Blick Rothenberg, the audit, tax and business advisory firm.
Partner Neil Insull said: "We know Ms Reeves won’t increase corporation tax, as she is keen to headline a cap on the corporation tax rate of 25% for the course of this Parliament. This leaves her with only one realistic ‘difficult decision’ to make for businesses, an increase in employers' NI contributions.
"However, increasing NI contributions could be counterproductive for Labour’s proposals to improve workers’ finances and increase the number of people in work. Some businesses may have no choice but to avoid taking on new hires, cut pay rises and scale back pensions to reduce their tax burden. Alternatively, businesses could pass those costs on to consumers with higher prices."
Could this affect investment?
The National Centre for Universities and Business said that a National Insurance surcharge on employers hiring graduates, which was included in a Higher Education Policy Institute report, could hinder both economic growth and business investment in the UK.
Rosalind Gill, of NCUB, said: "Raising a National Insurance surcharge for employers could have a range of unintended consequences. Employers already make significant contributions to higher learning, including working with universities on course design, placements, apprenticeships, and employability, as well as making investments in the lifelong learning of people beyond the three years of a degree.
"Further complicating the taxation system with an additional surcharge would not help employers to genuinely invest in the skills they need, and will not help address the challenges being faced in the university sector."
What's this about pensions?
Employers currently do not pay National Insurance on pension contributions, but this could change. Helen Morrissey, head of retirement analysis, Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "There are a few scenarios at play. One is that the headline rate of 13.8% on earnings above £175 per week gets increased – a move that will push up wage bills. The other is that National Insurance gets levied on employer pension contributions - a cost of up to 13.8% and a damaging one.
"Even if the government didn’t opt to impose the whole 13.8% on contributions it would still hurt. If, for example, it added employer NICs of 2% on contributions, it would add £17.25 per year to the cost of paying into the pension of someone earning £35,000 per year and receiving the auto-enrolment minimum of 3% from their employer. Spread that across a couple of hundred employees then the figures get big fast.
"The concern is that employers may look to mitigate these costs with smaller wage increases, which will impact people’s ability to meet their day-to-day living costs."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel