City AM, on UK Politics, 1 November 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Treasury minister: ‘I don’t think employers are working people’

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.1 finding

A top treasury minister has said she does not think “employers are working people” – reigniting fierce debate over whether Labour broke its manifesto pledge not to raise taxes for working people. In its 2024 election manifesto, Labour vowed not to increase taxes on ‘working people’, ruling out hikes to income tax, employee National Insurance and VAT. But the government has come under fire, as critics claim the pledge has been broken through significant changes to employer taxation and extended frozen thresholds, leaving those who own a business facing a high tax burden and increased costs.

But chief secretary to the Treasury, Emma Reynolds , disputed these concerns, arguing employers do not come under the umbrella of what the government considers to count as a working person. Speaking on GB News, Reynolds said: “I don’t think employers are working people, they are companies.” Autumn Budget woes Reynolds also disagreed with claims that employers had been treated unfairly in Healey’s maiden Budget, arguing the tax increases “were targeted and fair”.

But business owners have fiercely pushed back against Healey’s decisions. While the Treasury granted some support for entrepreneurs, including marginal rates relief for certain sectors and a headline 10 per cent Founder’s Relief, industry leaders have argued they are still exposed to a high tax burden. This includes the Chancellor’s decision to slash Business Asset Disposal Relief from £1m to £500,000, leaving small-business owners facing a heavier tax hit on sales.

Combined with former Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ ongoing freeze on tax thresholds and hikes to the minimum wage, employers have warned that more businesses will soon have to close their doors. Savings and rental income has also been blasted by industry leaders for targeting employers who rely on personal savings or property portfolios for an income. But Reynolds said she “did not agree with that” despite saying she understands some businesses “are in a difficult position”.

In the Budget, Healey unveiled sharp increases to the tax rates levied on savings interest and property income, lifting them to 24 per cent for basic-rate payers, 44 per cent for higher-rate payers, and 49 per cent for additional-rate earners from April 2027. For owner-managers and sole traders, . Entrepreneurs may reinvest spare rental returns or draw upon personal cash balances outside tax-free wrappers to finance business needs.

With the government treating landlords and savers as separate from workers, business organisations have warned that taxing these revenue streams will lead to many landlords selling up and exiting the market.

Read the original article on cityam.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

City AM reports Emma Reynolds' remark accurately, quotes her in full and states Labour's manifesto pledge precisely. In two places it slips the business lobby's case into its own voice: it calls the Budget's tax rise on savings and rental income a "raid" and states as fact that the move "closes off another critical buffer". These are minor word choices, and nothing in the article misleads the reader about what was said.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “Healey’s fresh raid on savings and rental income”

    Why this matters
    City AM calls the Budget's tax rise on savings and rental income a "raid" in its own voice, outside any quotation.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes the policy as a grab or a seizure, the verdict the measure's critics would give it.
    The context
    The article's own facts describe a rise in tax rates, and "raid" carries a verdict those facts do not. A plain report would call it a tax increase and leave the verdict to the industry leaders it quotes.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“sharp increases to the tax rates levied on savings interest and property income”

    Show it in the article

    “the move closes off another critical buffer”

    Why this matters
    City AM states in its own voice that the tax change "closes off another critical buffer" for owner-managers, with no attribution.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes the harm to small businesses as an established fact the outlet has checked.
    The context
    Elsewhere the article attributes this kind of claim to industry leaders and business groups. Here the business case passes into the outlet's own voice with nothing given to support it.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“industry leaders have argued they are still exposed to a high tax burden”

    Show it in the article

What it gets right

  • “Reynolds said: “I don’t think employers are working people, they are companies.””

    It gives the minister's words in full, including her explanation, so the headline quote is not cut down to its most damaging half.

  • “ruling out hikes to income tax, employee National Insurance and VAT”

    It states exactly what the manifesto pledge covered, so the reader can judge the dispute for themselves.

  • “critics claim the pledge has been broken”

    It attributes the charge of a broken pledge to critics rather than stating it as fact.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from City AM

  1. 1 NovCity of London chief named UK’s most influential black Briton6.0
  2. 1 NovHealey has left £49bn blackhole in Britain’s finances, claims Badenoch3.0
  3. 1 NovLabour will reduce ballooning benefits bill, claims John Healey3.0
  4. 30 OctRevealed: The luxury London pads getting Healey’s energy handout – while poorer areas miss out6.0
  5. 30 OctNext phase of workers rights overhaul risks hammering ‘labour market’3.0

Everything we scored from City AM