Category: Uncategorized

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has sacked 179 employees for gross misconduct in 2024, the highest number in at least five years, according to data obtained through a freedom of information request.
This represents a 43% increase from 2020 when 125 employees were dismissed for similar reasons, accounting for just 28% of all terminations at the time.
The recent dismissals, which now constitute over half of the 321 terminations at HMRC this year, reflect a firmer stance on disciplinary matters within the department, which employs over 65,000 staff. Gross misconduct encompasses serious breaches of conduct, such as bullying, theft, intoxication, damage to company property, gross negligence, or other actions that could harm the organisation. Specific to HMRC, it can include unlawful disclosure of sensitive taxpayer information or fraud using government systems.
In one notable case, a tax office worker was jailed for over two years after defrauding the taxpayer of £300,000 in child benefit by falsely claiming that three of her children were disabled and fabricating tax credit claims for another 15 children, using details accessed through her work computer system.
Civil servants can also face dismissal for unauthorised access to government databases. For instance, Louise Kelly, a 20-year veteran of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), was dismissed after improperly searching for her neighbour’s address in the “Searchlight” database, which contains sensitive financial and health information. Her dismissal was upheld by an employment tribunal, underscoring the importance of robust policies to prevent misuse of such systems.
The DWP also reported 190 dismissals for gross misconduct in 2023-24, accounting for about 40% of all terminations, down from 221 the previous year.
Steve Sweetlove of accountancy firm RSM noted that while the increase in gross misconduct dismissals at HMRC could seem troubling, it might also indicate a stricter approach to upholding standards of conduct. “Given the vital role HMRC staff play in dealing with taxpayer data and collecting revenues for the government, cases of gross negligence can represent a really serious issue, so it’s important that appropriate action is taken where necessary,” he said.
Michael Newman, an employment law specialist at Leigh Day, added that gross misconduct is reserved for the most serious breaches and remains relatively rare. He highlighted that what qualifies as gross misconduct can vary depending on the employee’s role, with fraud at HMRC being particularly serious.
The increase in dismissals comes as HMRC faces significant operational challenges, with customer service at what has been described as an “all-time low.” The department managed to answer only 66% of customer calls last year, well below its target of 85% and down from 71% in 2022-23. Rising demand for HMRC services, driven by frozen tax thresholds pulling more taxpayers into higher rates, has compounded these issues.
The Public Accounts Committee earlier this year criticised HMRC’s service levels, describing them as the worst they have ever been, following an “unprecedented” number of complaints about the tax office’s performance. Additionally, levels of bullying and harassment at HMRC are reported at 8%, while employee engagement is at 56%, the lowest in the civil service compared to a benchmark of 64%.
A government spokesman acknowledged the challenges but emphasised that all large organisations face occasional issues with staff behaviour. “We take all allegations seriously to ensure we work in an inclusive environment that is friendly, tolerant and respectful,” the spokesman said. “All our employees must ensure they follow our code of conduct alongside the civil service code, with breaches looked into and if necessary investigated, potentially resulting in dismissal.”
As HMRC prepares to receive additional funding for recruitment, the need for strong oversight and support for new recruits will be crucial in maintaining standards and improving overall performance.
Read more:
HMRC dismissals for gross misconduct hit five-year high as 179 civil servants sacked

Successful digital marketing involves constant review of your SEO, PPC campaigns and website UX, which can result in a sense akin to FOMO for marketers concerned about getting the best possible ROMI (Return on Marketing Investment).
Phil Turner of Bespoke explains how to judge if your marketing is working, and how to strike a balance between staying at the top of your digital marketing game, without confusing your customers through over-adaptation.
In 2023, digital ad spend in the UK is set to exceed £30billion. But research by Bespoke shows that, of that figure, an estimated 31% is wasted. That’s £9.3billion being spent every year on digital tactics that generate no, or limited, return.
We conducted our research by analysing the findings of our Digital Strategy Workshops carried out over five years with companies from across the North West and South East of England, two of the UK’s hotspots for digital marketing as a whole.
The workshops, targeted at inhouse digital marketers, start with an extensive audit of current spend on all areas of digital marketing. After analysing the results over five years, we were astounded to realise just how much digital marketing spend on average is currently wasted. The key culprits according to our findings are:
Spend on PPC on platforms that simply don’t work for that industry
PPC is not like playing the lottery. It’s not a case of being in it to win it. To avoid wasting money, PPC campaigns have to be aligned with buying behaviour for that industry. If you have a niche product that consumers search for, Google is the natural choice. If it’s a consumer product that’s disrupting the market in some way, Facebook is a good option. If it’s corporate B2B, LinkedIn is probably best. But rarely will you get good returns from all three. Yes, there can be a case of trial and error. But if it’s more often error, the best move companies can make to improve these digital tactics is simply to switch them off. The saved money can be put into meaningful investments such as UX, which in fact will help convert more customers who’ve reached the site through appropriate clicks.
Paid ads just left to run
Sometimes, when a PPC plan is put in place and can be seen to work, companies just leave it running. This “if it ain’t broke” attitude can lead to huge losses from campaigns that can actually be improved by ongoing management, maintenance and development. In the worst-case scenarios, we’ve seen many more companies than you might imagine, who have simply set up campaigns and then forgotten about them. In the interim, they have updated their products and services, making these old ads meaningless, and every click they get, simply a waste of money.
Again, the advice here is review your campaigns regularly and seek constant improvement.  If they’re not working, turn them off, or change them.
Jumping too soon
The third most common way digital ad spend is simply wasted is where companies start spending before they have got the fundamentals right. If you have not carefully worked out your product or service’s positioning in the marketplace before you start spending on ads, you’re bound to be wasting a large portion of your budget.
The lesson is simple: Look before you leap. Spending the time, before you start spending your money, to get your digital strategy aligned with your products’ USPs in the context of the marketplace you’re entering will save you huge amounts of budget in the long-run.
Companies can avoid wastage by investing money and time in getting their digital strategy right before they start handing their money to Google or social media platforms.
Being aware of the potential areas of digital wastage can be the absolute decider between glorious success or outright failure as an online marketer.
Strategy
As a simple question, does your web strategy make your business stand out in your industry? A well researched strategy is fundamental to successful online lead-generation. To perform well, websites and campaigns should be designed around a well researched strategy. For example, one that includes deep profiling of your ideal customer, consistent marketing messages that have been proven to excite your customer, and an understanding of the expected return on investment across each of the digital channels available to you.
Website
Do you have a performance website with a great conversion rate? Many business persevere with an old or underperforming website for too long. A performance website is designed based on data and built with advanced lead-magnets. For example, a performance website might convert 1 in 20 of its visitors to leads whilst a regular website might only convert 1 in 200.
A brand refresh and website redesign by senior professionals who are specialist in your sector will typically improve performance overnight (on average we see an instant 15% performance increase when we relaunch a website – equivalent to £100,000s of new business in some cases).
Marketing
Do your campaigns get more high quality leads than competitors? When a business has a good strategy and website in place it makes sense to invest in online marketing campaigns to drive laser targeted prospects to your lead magnets.
Yet, we often see budget being wasted on campaigns that are poorly targeted or whose key messages do not excite the target customer. When it comes to marketing campaigns there is competition for the best value traffic across digital channels so it pays for your campaigns to be in the best shape they possibly can be.
When these three essentials are fully developed and working in harmony, a business gets the best possible flow of quality leads from its website and other online marketing. But if any of the three are not quite as they should be, the whole marketing operation underperforms. A weakness in one weakens the others too.
Read more:
FOMO about ROMI? How do you know when your marketing is working?

Angela Rayner, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, has endorsed plans to transform the disused Trelavour clay pit near St Austell into a major lithium mine, a move that could significantly bolster the UK’s battery-making capabilities.
The site, operated by Cornish Lithium, is projected to supply 25,000 tonnes of lithium per year by 2030, helping to power British-made electric vehicles with domestically sourced batteries.
Lithium is a vital component in battery production, and developing the Trelavour site is expected to play a key role in meeting the rising demand for electric vehicles in the UK. With Rayner’s decision to upgrade the project to a “project of national significance,” the planning approval process will be accelerated, with ministers overseeing the approval rather than local authorities.
Cornwall’s rich deposits of lithium, embedded in the same granite rock that once supported the county’s historic china clay industry, have the potential to make the region the heart of the UK’s lithium mining sector. Jeremy Wrathall, CEO of Cornish Lithium, highlighted the importance of the project, stating, “This marks another stage in the UK’s journey from relying on imported lithium to maximising the potential of the industrial scale of lithium that already lies beneath our feet at existing brownfield sites in Cornwall.”
Securing a domestic supply of lithium could reduce the UK’s dependence on imports from Australia, South America, and China, cutting carbon emissions and logistical costs associated with overseas sourcing. The Trelavour pit plans to produce 10,000 tonnes of lithium hydroxide annually, with an additional 15,000 tonnes sourced from geothermal waters in other parts of Cornwall.
The UK’s push towards electric vehicles is set to intensify, with quotas for EVs expected to rise from 22% of all new cars sold in 2024 to 80% by 2030, and reaching 100% by 2035. With over 1.2 million electric cars currently on UK roads—around 3.5% of the total—this figure is projected to grow to 20% by 2030, driving up the demand for lithium significantly.
Cornish Lithium’s initiative could potentially meet over half of the UK car industry’s lithium needs, estimated at 80,000 tonnes by 2030. This domestic supply would not only support the UK’s electric vehicle targets but also underpin the broader use of lithium in other technologies, including rechargeable batteries for mobile phones, laptops, and critical medical devices like heart pacemakers.
As the UK car manufacturing industry remains a crucial export sector, particularly to the EU, the development of a local lithium supply chain is seen as a strategic move to secure the industry’s future amid increasing global competition and environmental targets.
Read more:
Cornish Lithium mine granted special status to power UK’s electric vehicle ambitions

Budding entrepreneurs from disadvantaged backgrounds in the North-West of England have a chance to secure £150,000 in funding, advertising, and resource support through the Havas Boost programme, launched by Havas Media Network UK.
This initiative aims to empower business owners outside London by providing vital financial and strategic support to those demonstrating a purpose beyond profit.
The programme invites ten applicants to pitch their business ideas in a Dragons’ Den-style event during Global Entrepreneurship Week (18-25 November). To qualify, applicants must come from less advantaged backgrounds and have an existing business of 2-3 years that embodies a commitment to societal impact alongside commercial success.
Following the pitch event in Manchester, a panel of local entrepreneurial talent will shortlist four candidates, from which Havas Boost’s board will select the ultimate winner. The decision to base the programme in Manchester was driven by insights from a YouGov business survey, which found that 40% of less advantaged under-35s in the North West feel there are limited opportunities for starting a business, compared to just 19% in London.
The 2024 Havas Boost programme is supported by the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce and the Media Trust, and awareness will be raised through a dedicated advertising campaign across Manchester.
For more information and to apply, visit Havas Boost.
Read more:
£150,000 available to support North-West entrepreneurs from disadvantaged backgrounds

UK R&D tax relief enables companies undertaking innovative activities and qualifying R&D projects to claim corporation tax relief and/or tax credits on qualifying R&D expenditure.
The purpose being to encourage UK innovation by providing relief on qualifying R&D spend, effectively derisking the cost of the R&D work for qualifying companies. This has enabled companies to invest in vital R&D that aims to achieve scientific and/or technological advancements, which typically leads to additional employment and increased expertise in the UK. It is universally recognised that without innovation in business, economies will not grow, therefore a reduction in R&D tax relief and discouraging valid companies from claiming may result in the UK falling behind other major world economies.
R&D tax relief has been in existence for more than 20 years, however over the last couple of years there have been monumental changes, including a significant increase in HMRC enquiries. Over the life of the R&D schemes, the number of companies claiming R&D tax relief has increased exponentially, partly because companies and their advisors have become more experienced and adept at identifying qualifying R&D activities but also because some companies, often misled by rogue R&D advisors have pushed the boundaries of the legislation, leading to exaggerated and fraudulent claims being filed.
Historically, HMRC’s enquiry rate was 1% and the vast majority of R&D claims were processed with no or few questions asked. This all changed a couple of years ago with the introduction of the HMRC R&D ISBC enquiry team. It was widely accepted in the accounting and tax profession that change was needed to tackle inflated and fraudulent R&D claims, however, the resulting consequences of HMRC’s sledgehammer approach to enquiries, along with the changes in legislation reducing the amount of relief available, has had a disastrous impact to genuine claimants and has the potential to cripple the UK’s economy and innovation.
The ISBC unit was primarily made up of newly trained and inexperienced R&D staff and although the enquiry process quite rightly sought to target companies who were making overinflated and fraudulent claims, HMRC’s volume approach to enquiries has also targeted genuine qualifying companies, who have been caught up in long drawn out enquiries, where in some cases, HMRC has ignored evidence and denied companies the opportunity to discuss the R&D claim in person, instead adopting a tunnel vision approach to deny genuine qualifying companies this vital tax relief.
Across other HMRC taxes, when enquiries are opened, there is usually a named HMRC caseworker/Inspector, allowing a level of understanding, direct contact and collaboration between taxpayers, advisors and HMRC to ensure the correct amount of tax is paid, which has enabled fairness and trust in the enquiry process, very much in line with the taxpayer’s charter. Unfortunately, this is not the case with the ISBC unit as no names are provided as to the HMRC staff conducting the enquiries, reducing accountability and recourse when serious errors have been made.
The accounting/tax profession and their professional bodies have understandably been up in arms about HMRC’s failings and the adverse ramifications it is having on companies genuinely undertaking qualifying R&D. Some companies have been pushed into serious financial difficulties and many have thrown in the towel, deciding not to contest HMRC’s decision to disallow their claim, as they do not have the resources to fight against the might of HMRC. Companies do have the choice to appeal against HMRC’s decisions at a tax tribunal, but to do this requires significant cost and time which many companies simply cannot afford, particularly start-ups.
It is easy to overlook the significant and cumulative adverse effect that a lack of investment in innovation by businesses is likely to have on the UK economy in the future. With thousands of legitimate R&D qualifying companies experiencing an unjust and unfair enquiry process, and the adverse consequences this has brought, many have had no choice but to reduce resources spent on innovating or stop innovating completely. Whilst tax takings from HMRC denying legitimate claims may appear to increase in the short term, the long-term adverse effect on growth in the economy and associated tax takings could be devastating, with ramifications across all industries and supply chains.
The Chartered Institute of Tax (CIOT) has written comprehensive open complaint letters to HMRC regarding the serious failings occurring in the current R&D enquiry process. However, despite HMRC recognising its lack of training and that serious errors have been made, not enough is being done to address HMRC’s failings, or deal with unscrupulous R&D advisors.
The reduction in tax relief available, the increased costs required to support R&D claims, combined with the increased risk of HMRC denying genuine qualifying companies R&D tax relief has significantly deterred companies from investing in innovation, creating a perfect storm and a potentially disastrous effect on growth in the economy moving forward.
It is now more important than ever that genuine R&D claimants ensure they are working with experienced, creditable R&D tax advisors. Collaborating with their advisors throughout the year to develop their R&D strategy, understanding the complexities of the R&D schemes and the increased requirements and capturing evidence in ‘real time’ is now essential, to support their R&D claims and mitigate the risk of an enquiry. Gone are the days of a ‘light touch’ approach at the end of the accounting year, it is vital companies choose the right R&D advisors and challenge the advice they are given. If something seems too good to be true, it often is. But with the right advisors, expert advice and a robust R&D strategy, companies can navigate through the complexities of the R&D schemes to ensure if HMRC do enquire, their claims stand up to this intense and rigorous scrutiny.  This in turn should help restore a level of confidence to the R&D tax relief schemes and encourage the innovation and growth the UK economy needs.
About the Author:
Rory Fothergill is an experienced R&D and Tax Advisory Senior Manager at JS Accountants and Business Advisors.  He has a wealth of experience in supporting companies with R&D claims, advising on how to strengthen and protect claims, advising on R&D systems and processes, and successfully navigating HMRC R&D enquiries. Rory and JS also provide specialist R&D support and advice to clients of smaller partner accountancy practices, to ensure their clients can also benefit from expert and experienced comprehensive R&D support.
Read more:
A Disaster for Innovation – The Research and Development Relief Perfect Storm

It’s a warm, smug sort of thought, isn’t it? That you could just throw money at a problem, like lobbing loose change at a busker, and suddenly you’re the king of the world. Or in Lawrence Stroll’s case, the king of Formula One.
Now, there are few places where the concept of ‘buying success’ rings more true than in the high-octane, ultra-glamorous world of F1. And it’s a narrative as old as time: the plucky underdog dethroning the incumbent monarch with a little cash and a lot of cunning. We just need to look at the 2009 season and the amazing wonder that was Brawn GP with Ross Brawn buying a team for one pound just before the start of the season and winning the championship by the end of it. Except here, the plucky underdog is a billionaire with more yachts than you have socks, and his cunning move is to hire the best mind in the business. Enter Adrian Newey, the Michelangelo of F1 car design.
For those unfamiliar, Newey’s not just some bloke who sketches out go-faster stripes in crayon. He’s the mastermind behind many a championship-winning car. Red Bull, Williams, McLaren—they’ve all basked in the glory of Newey’s genius. So when the news broke that Stroll, owner of the Aston Martin F1 team, might be looking to secure Newey’s signature once he had decided to leave Red Bull, eyebrows shot up faster than an F1 car off the starting grid. Is this just a case of ‘here we go again,’ with a rich man thinking he can buy himself a crown?
Let’s not beat around the bush—Formula One is a game of obscene wealth. Always has been. But while the likes of Ferrari and Mercedes pour millions into wind tunnels and tyre compounds, it’s the brain behind the machine that often makes the real difference. Sure, money can buy you state-of-the-art tech, but it can’t buy you the uncanny knack of reading airflow like it’s a Sunday crossword, and that’s where Newey comes in. He’s the chap who can look at a car’s aerodynamic profile and see not just a sleek bit of engineering, but victory—or failure. It’s the kind of instinct you can’t teach or buy; it’s just… there. Like some blessed, magical talent that makes the rest of us mere mortals feel woefully inadequate.
Lawrence Stroll is no stranger to splashing the cash. He’s already dragged Aston Martin out of the midfield mire with the kind of financial clout that turns heads and raises eyebrows. But Stroll knows that having a budget larger than the GDP of a small nation is only half the battle. The other half is knowing what to do with it. And what better way to spend your millions than by hiring the best in the business?
Newey signing to join Aston Martin is a coup of historic proportions. It would be like Real Madrid signing Lionel Messi in his prime, or Apple hiring Jonny Ive’s to design their mobile phone idea. It’s an audacious, bold, and undeniably risky move, but that’s precisely the kind of move that Stroll loves. He’s not in this for the slow and steady climb up the ranks. He wants champagne on the podium, not flat Prosecco in the pit lane.
But let’s not get carried away. For all of Newey’s talents, he’s not a one-man band. It’s not as if he’s strapping into the car himself and setting lap records. F1 is still a team sport, one that requires not just a wizard of design but drivers who can squeeze every last drop of performance from the car, pit crews that operate like Swiss watches, and strategies that are more 4D chess than checkers. And let’s not forget, Newey’s been at Red Bull for yonks, crafting cars around the driving style of Max Verstappen, who, by all accounts, could probably win a race in a shopping trolley.
What Stroll is really buying is not just Newey’s brain but his credibility. The cachet that comes with having Adrian Newey on your payroll is immense. It’s a statement that Aston Martin isn’t just here to make up the numbers; they’re here to win. But credibility doesn’t always translate into championships. Just ask Ferrari.
So has Lawrence Stroll bought himself the Formula One World Championship by potentially hiring Adrian Newey? Well, he’s certainly bought himself a fighting chance. But F1 is a fickle beast. One minute you’re sipping Moët in Monaco, the next you’re trudging through gravel traps wondering where it all went wrong. Stroll’s gamble, if it pays off, could be a masterstroke. If it doesn’t, it’ll be yet another footnote in the long, costly saga of F1 dreams gone awry.
At the end of the day, success in Formula One isn’t just about who has the deepest pockets but who uses them best. And if Stroll can pull this off, it won’t just be because he threw a wad of cash at a problem. It’ll be because he understood what really makes a winning team. And that, dear reader, would be worth every penny.
Read more:
Has Lawrence Stroll Just Bought the Formula One World Championship by Hiring F1 Design Guru Adrian Newey

Britain’s exporters are feeling increasingly ill-equipped to seize international opportunities, according to the latest annual research commissioned by the Department for Business and Trade.
The survey of 3,000 businesses with revenues exceeding £500,000 found that only 18% considered themselves experts in exporting last year, down from 24% the previous year. This is the lowest level recorded since Britain’s Trade and Co-operation Agreement with the EU came into effect in 2021.
The proportion of businesses reporting low levels of exporting knowledge rose from 23% in 2022 to 28% last year, while the remainder admitted they could manage but recognised the need to improve their expertise. The findings suggest a growing knowledge gap among exporting businesses, particularly following the UK’s exit from the EU.
This decline in expertise has coincided with calls from a consortium of major tech companies and business support groups for the government to enhance export support for small businesses as part of its revised industrial and trade strategy. The E-Commerce Trade Commission, which includes members such as Amazon, Alibaba, eBay, Shopify, and Google, along with business bodies like the Federation of Small Businesses, has urged the government to simplify official guidance, place greater emphasis on e-commerce and digital trade tools, and provide more grants.
Richard Hyde, a senior researcher at the Social Market Foundation and author of the commission’s report, highlighted the importance of increasing exports among small businesses. He noted, “The vast majority of British businesses are smaller businesses, but too few of them are exporting at present. Achieving higher levels of exporting should be a key lever for the government’s growth mission.”
Gareth Thomas, the minister for exports, acknowledged the need to boost digital trade and support small firms in exporting globally. He said, “We are working with industry to boost digital trade so that more small firms can export right around the world, and our modern industrial strategy will help us deliver long-term, stable growth that supports skilled jobs.”
The survey also revealed that while 40% of businesses sought advice and support last year, awareness of specific government-funded resources, such as the network of international trade advisers and the export support service, remains low. The most frequently used source of advice was the main government website, utilised by 45% of respondents.
Despite seeking support, the proportion of companies that have ever exported has been declining since 2021, dropping from 45% that year to 39% in 2023. Most exporters reported that they do not actively pursue new overseas orders, with only 27% saying they actively seek new export opportunities.
The E-Commerce Trade Commission also stressed the need to encourage more businesses led by women to export and to make emerging market opportunities more accessible. They argued that tailored and easily accessible support could help bridge the knowledge gap and enable more SMEs to contribute to the UK’s growth through increased exports.
The findings underscore the need for targeted government interventions to better equip British businesses with the tools and knowledge required to thrive in global markets, particularly as the UK continues to navigate its post-Brexit trading landscape.
Read more:
Britain’s exporters lack expertise, survey reveals

Nearly two million self-employed workers in the UK are facing a looming pensions crisis due to inadequate savings, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has warned.
The latest report reveals that only 500,000 self-employed individuals earning more than £10,000 annually are contributing to a pension, leaving 1.8 million without any pension savings.
This marks a significant decline in savings rates among the self-employed over the past 25 years. In 1998, nearly two-thirds of self-employed workers saved into a pension, whereas now the majority have never contributed to one. As a result, three-quarters of the self-employed are expected to retire on an income of less than £15,000 per year, including their state pension, according to the joint report from the IFS and the Abrdn Financial Fairness Trust.
At current savings rates, 55% of self-employed individuals will have no private pension provision at all in their retirement. The report suggests that a typical self-employed person aged between 25 and 34 can get back on track by saving 9% of their income annually, while those in their 50s would need to save 18% to achieve an adequate retirement income.
David Sturrock, an economist at the IFS, urged the Government to consider measures to encourage pension saving among the self-employed, such as prompting them to invest in a pension as part of their tax return process or automatically enrolling them into a pension plan unless they choose to opt out.
Sturrock said, “Policymakers have two key options to help the self-employed save for retirement. Both build on the fact that self-employed people have to fill in a tax return at the end of each year. The Government could either get the self-employed to make an active choice over whether to save into a pension or Lifetime Isa, or enrol them automatically into a long-term savings plan, which they could opt out of.”
The success of auto-enrolment for private sector employees, which has seen workplace pension participation soar from just over 40% to more than 85% since 2012, underscores the potential benefits of similar schemes for the self-employed, who are not currently covered by this system.
Mubin Haq, chief executive of the Abrdn Financial Fairness Trust, emphasised the urgency of government action, noting, “The self-employed make up an increasing share of the UK’s workforce but far too many are on track to have a poor retirement. More than half have no private pensions savings. Auto-enrolment was a sea-change for employees, rapidly increasing the numbers saving into a pension. We now need to use similar methods for the self-employed to actively nudge them into thinking about their financial futures.”
The report also recommends encouraging the self-employed to increase their pension contributions over time to counteract inflation. It suggests adjusting the default settings on direct debit contributions so they automatically rise, potentially in line with the consumer prices index, to ensure savings keep pace with inflation.
This approach would align private pensions more closely with the state pension system, which benefits from the triple lock, increasing payments by the highest of inflation, average wages, or 2.5%. The next state pension increase is expected to reflect wage growth, predicted to be around 4.1%.
A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) responded, saying, “We welcome this report and will carefully consider its findings and conclusions in connection with our review of the pensions landscape to improve retirement outcomes and investment in the UK economy.”
With the self-employed forming a growing segment of the UK’s workforce, there is increasing pressure on policymakers to address the pensions gap and ensure better financial security for this group in retirement.
Read more:
Two million self-employed workers face pension crisis, warns IFS