It’s over for Britain, crushed by Labour’s cruel war on the middle classes

Starmer’s betrayal of those who have saved and worked hard is built on lies, ignorance and class hatred

This is going to be the worst budget in decades, a milestone in Britain’s accelerating decline, a farrago of deceit, vindictiveness and economic illiteracy. Having sworn that its spending commitments were fully costed, that it had “no plans” for further tax rises, Labour is now warning of “painful” increases to come, especially on those with “the broadest shoulders”. 
Not content with having lied so grotesquely, and being elected under false pretences, Labour is continuing to take the voters for fools. The Government is showering union comrades with cash and the economy is recovering, but we are meant to believe that it has no choice, that a supposed fiscal black hole inherited from those dastardly Tories must immediately be filled by higher taxes. Yes, the Conservatives were useless, but Keir Starmer didn’t need much of a casus belli to unleash a socialist war on wealth.
Life is about to become a lot nastier for what the Left describe as “the rich” but who would usually be more accurately categorised as belonging to the coping classes. These are the kinds of people who often struggle to pay their mortgages, afford childcare and accumulate a little wealth for retirement. Those likely to be singled out for a shakedown belong to five overlapping groups: the top fifth of income taxpayers (soon to be anybody on £50,000, where the 40p tax rate begins, or above); small investors; private school parents; owners of expensive homes; and pensioners. 
Gordon Brown’s raid on pension funds in his first Budget was one of the most destructive decisions ever taken by a chancellor. He removed the 20 per cent tax credit enjoyed by pension funds on dividends from UK companies, trashing returns, fatally undermining retirement schemes and triggering a series of other unforeseen catastrophes. 
Rachel Reeves could go one further if she chooses to follow a blueprint from the Fabian Society that is being widely discussed in Left-wing circles. Tax relief on employee and employer pension contributions, the last big “loophole” in the tax code, is worth £66 billion a year; only a third of that (£22 billion) is offset by tax levied on pensions paid out. Some 53 per cent of the tax relief went to the top fifth of income tax payers, which to the Fabians is terribly unfair. 
Their answer: slash tax relief to a flat rate of 25-30 per cent; drastically reduce the tax-free lump sum that pensioners can take out of their pots; charge national insurance on private pension incomes; slap employer national insurance on pension contributions; and charge inheritance and even income tax on pension assets. 
The end result: a massive increase in tax, special privileges to protect public sector final pension schemes and, to rescue private schemes, an increase in employer contributions under automatic enrolment from 3 to 7 per cent of earnings, depressing pay rises for years. 
Such a proposal would be a disaster for Britain’s army of 40p and 45p taxpayers, the linchpin of the economy. Why should they bother staying in Britain? If the 40p rate were to affect the same, smaller share of people as it did in 1991, its threshold would need to double to £100,000 in 2027–28, the Institute for Fiscal Studies calculates. On top of that, taxpayers used to enjoy mortgage tax relief (phased out by Brown) as well as generous pension tax relief. 
This has been hacked back, but the Fabian plan would be the final nail in the coffin. The top fifth of taxpayers would also bear the brunt of Reeves’ likely decision to increase capital gains tax, perhaps aligning the rate to that of income tax, and also to widen the scope of inheritance tax. Those on somewhat higher incomes are already being hammered by Reeves’ class war against private schools, and many professionals will see their opportunities diminished as non-doms leave London. 
Pensioners, reeling from the removal of the winter fuel allowance, might be hit again: the Treasury would love those still in work to pay National Insurance Contributions. Last but not least, I fear that Reeves will either revalue council tax, landing millions of families with higher bills, or introduce a property wealth tax, replacing council tax (and perhaps stamp duty) by a proportional, annual levy on houses, forcing hundreds of thousands of asset-rich but cash-poor homeowners to sell up. 
In The Politics of Procrustes, Antony Flew identified the malady at the heart of the socialist project. Procrustes was an egalitarian bandit who would lurk between Athens and Eleusis. He would force travellers to lie in a metal bed. If their legs were too long, he would amputate them; if they were too short, he would stretch them to make them fit. 
Starmer and Reeves are Procrustean technocrats. Their egalitarianism is their central value, which explains why they are so confused about growth. They seem to think that the economy is driven by house building, infrastructure projects, mass immigration, green energy and trade with the EU, all of which can be partly directed by the state. 
Of course, we need more homes and infrastructure, but real, sustainable growth requires gifted entrepreneurs to create new, more productive companies that compete globally. It involves growing the City of London again, as well as tech and science firms; it necessitates a boom in private investment and innovations by flexible workforces; it needs cheaper energy and less regulation. Real growth stems from, and leads to, inequality: it entails a tax system that rewards work, investment and success. 
In Denver, aimed at 5- to 6-year-olds, David McKee, the best-selling children’s author, tells the story of a wealthy man. He is kind and generous, and employs many villagers. He is popular until a stranger turns up and begins to ferment jealousy by telling the villagers it isn’t “fair” that he is richer than them. Disgusted, Denver divides his money equally between his neighbours and moves to a more welcoming town, where he rebuilds his fortune. The original villagers burn their cash on a holiday, before returning to their impoverished, jobless hamlet, destroyed by the green-eyed monster. 
McKee, who lived in France, was inspired by that country’s disastrous wealth tax. Britain is now equally set on a path to ruin, and it is the middle classes that will bear the brunt of the coming calamity.