When saving money costs us more...

“They promised savings. The figures tell a different story."

I’ve noticed an interesting trend emerging from the Treasury over the last few weeks — a sort of economic sleight of hand. Recently they proudly announced:

“The Chancellor is set to freeze fares at the Budget, with passengers not paying a penny more on season tickets, peak returns for commuters and off-peak returns between major cities. The move will save commuters hundreds of pounds off their season tickets, freeze costs for travellers, and support growth in town centres across the country. Commuters on the more expensive routes will save more than £300 per year.”

Lovely stuff. Except… it’s not really a saving, is it? It’s simply an expense that isn’t going up. In Treasury maths, this now qualifies as a gift.

For retail, hospitality and leisure (RHL), the Chancellor went even further at the recent Budget:

“The tax rate for small RHL properties will be the lowest since 1990/91, falling by nearly 12p next year.”

Cue publicans and restaurateurs breathing a collective sigh of relief. Perhaps even raising a cautious half-pint in celebration.

And then the detail arrives:

“This is a big deal – it is a permanent tax cut worth nearly £900 million per year and benefitting over 750,000 RHL properties.”

Brilliant, I thought — how on earth are they going to pull that off?

Apparently like this:

“We are paying for this tax cut through higher rates on the top one per cent of the most valuable properties. Large distribution warehouses, such as those used by online giants, will pay around £100 million more in 2026/27, with this going directly to lower bills for in-person retail.”

So far, so Robin Hood. But then, in the very next breath:

“But this fall in the tax rate isn’t big enough to offset the impact of new post-COVID valuations, plus the ending of the temporary relief that many pubs and other RHL businesses benefit from that has been winding down since COVID.”

And this is where the wand slips, the hat tips over, and the rabbit makes a run for it.

After spending far too long decoding the most complex Transitional Relief scheme known to humankind, I discover my business will actually be paying £7,000 more than this year. Oh.

Yet we’re told:

“Overall, we’re spending £4.3 billion of taxpayer money on a support package.”

Are you really “spending £4.3 billion of taxpayer money” when businesses — taxpayers — are paying more? It’s a philosophical question, I suppose. Just not the one anyone wanted to be asking.

All this “we’re saving you money” messaging sits uncomfortably with me because, well… we’re not children. We can read the bill. We can see the numbers. And they’re not pretty.

What’s most frustrating here isn’t just the cost; it’s the confusion. Businesses don’t need smoke and mirrors — we need clarity, stability, and policies we can actually plan around.

Freezing a rise isn’t the same as providing support, and dressing it up as a windfall just erodes trust.

And now, with speculation swirling that the Chancellor may have overstated the seriousness of the economic landscape to justify higher taxes, the whole picture becomes even harder to swallow. If the foundations of the Budget were built on a narrative darker than reality, then it’s hardly surprising that the policies feel misaligned with what businesses actually need.

It’s time for the government to have an honest conversation with the sectors it claims to champion — not a dramatic one, not a strategically gloomy one, but a truthful one. Because without transparency, the only thing these measures grow is scepticism. And after years of crisis management, that’s the last thing businesses like ours can afford more of.