While TAP welcomes higher taxes on banks, property and savings income to fund household relief, it calls for fundamental reform of Council Tax, Capital Gains Tax, and the taxation of online giants to deliver lasting prosperity. London 29 October 2026: Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) has welcomed the direction of the Chancellor's Budget, particularly the decision to raise additional revenue from banks and income from savings and property to provide relief for households struggling with rising living costs. However, the organisation warns that the measures, while welcome, do not go far enough in addressing the structural problems in Britain's tax system that contribute to inequality, financial hardship and uneven economic growth. Tom Burgess, CEO of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: "The Chancellor may be getting the broad direction right. Asking banks and those receiving income from property and savings to contribute more, while providing relief to ordinary families, is a welcome step towards a fairer system. "While the Budget may offer breathing space, there is now indication of future fundamental change. The government now needs to use that breathing space to develop reforms that will have a much greater impact over time. "If the Prime Minister and Chancellor want to spread prosperity across the country, they need a tax system that supports that ambition. That means looking seriously at how we tax wealth, land and property, rather than continuing to make adjustments to an outdated system." Tax wealth more fairly, bring Capital Gains Tax closer to Income Tax TAP believes the Budget's approach to taxing income from assets more fairly should be extended to Capital Gains Tax (CGT). Tom Burgess said: "Why should someone who earns money from the increase in value of an asset often pay a lower rate of tax than someone who earns the same amount through work? We want to see Capital Gains Tax rates brought closer to Income Tax rates, with appropriate protections for genuine business investment and entrepreneurship. That would be a logical next step in creating a tax system that rewards productive activity while ensuring wealth contributes fairly to the prosperity of the country." Council Tax reform is long overdue TAP is also calling for a comprehensive reform of property taxation, including replacing the outdated Council Tax system. In England, Council Tax bands are still based on property values from 1991, despite enormous changes in property prices and regional values over the past 35 years. "This is a glaring example of a tax system that has failed to keep pace with economic reality," Tom Burgess said. Two properties that had similar values in 1991 may have experienced very different increases since then, yet their Council Tax bands are still determined by those historic values. The government wants growth and prosperity to reach every part of Britain. We agree. But that requires a fairer property tax system that reflects current land values, rather than valuations made a generation ago. "A modern system based on land values, with proper protections for people on low incomes, would provide a more rational foundation for local taxation and could help support balanced regional development." Online giants must contribute fairly to thriving high streets TAP welcomes the Budget's decision to make online marketplaces responsible for collecting VAT on qualifying sales by UK businesses. However, it believes the government should go further in examining how large online businesses contribute to the communities and infrastructure on which they depend. Tom Burgess added: "The Chancellor wants to restore Britain's high streets. So do we! Making online marketplaces responsible for collecting VAT is a sensible step, but it does not resolve the wider imbalance between businesses operating from expensive high-street premises and large online competitors. The government should examine a turnover-based tax on major online retailers, designed to ensure they make a fair contribution without penalising smaller businesses or undermining investment. "Supporting high streets requires more than temporary Business Rates relief. It needs a taxation system that reflects how modern commerce actually works." From short-term relief to lasting prosperity TAP also welcomes the government's commitment to introduce a new category of ringfenced preventive spending at the 2027 Spending Review. The organisation believes this could help shift government policy away from repeatedly managing the consequences of poverty towards preventing hardship before it occurs. Tom Burgess continued: "Preventing poverty is not simply a moral objective. It is an economic opportunity. When people have secure incomes, affordable homes and the opportunity to participate fully in the economy, they are better able to contribute to growth. At the same time, government can reduce some of the substantial costs associated with homelessness, ill health, debt and crisis intervention. Prevention must become part of the way we design taxation, public spending and economic policy — not simply another category of expenditure." TAP offers to work with government on reform TAP is calling for a comprehensive, phased programme of tax reform, developed collaboratively with government, businesses, economists and civil society. The organisation has secured 33 MPs from five political parties as signatories to its Prioritise Poverty Prevention Pledge and is developing a parliamentary briefing programme to support informed discussion of practical solutions. Tom Burgess concluded: "We recognise the difficult economic circumstances facing the Chancellor and the importance of maintaining business confidence and fiscal stability. We are not suggesting that fundamental tax reform can happen overnight. But government can begin setting out the direction, consulting on the options and developing a credible timetable. The Chancellor has taken some steps in the right direction. We want to help government build on them. "Breathing space is welcome. Now let's use it to build lasting prosperity." ENDS Notes to editors: Budget measures referenced Temporary increase in the Bank Corporation Tax Surcharge from 3% to 6%. Further two-percentage-point increases in tax rates on savings and property income from April 2027. £100 Household Energy Payment for eligible households in England from January 2027. Online marketplace VAT collection responsibility extended to qualifying UK business sales from October 2027. New ringfenced preventive spending category planned for the 2027 Spending Review. Three editorial points 1. Council Tax valuation date corrected. It is 1 April 1991 in England, not 1988. Wales uses 2003 valuations, so I've specified England. 2. Online turnover tax. I've made this a proposal for examination rather than an assertion that it is the only solution. A tax on turnover can affect low-margin businesses disproportionately and potentially increase consumer prices. TAP will need a credible model, particularly if it wants to engage constructively with Treasury officials. 3. The central argument is stronger. Rather than criticising the Budget for being a collection of sticking plasters, TAP now recognises the rationale behind the immediate measures and identifies the next logical steps. The Budget's additional bank surcharge, increases in property and savings income taxes, and online marketplace VAT measure are confirmed in the Treasury documentation. For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against PovertyTaxpayers against Poverty is an independent, non-partisan organisation campaigning for practical policies that prevent poverty, reduce inequality and unnecessary financial hardship, and create better long-term value for taxpayers. Its current policy programme includes The Prevention Dividend, Connected Britain, Green Prosperity, Location, Location plus tax reform, housing, transport, and inclusive economic growth. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Network, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life; The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing; Purple Shoots which helps people excluded from mainstream finance start sustainable microbusinesses by providing small ethical loans alongside practical support and mentoring, creating income, independence and stronger local economies as well as Real Agenda Radio (RAR) which is the network’s media platform, providing podcasts, interviews and commentary that amplify under-reported issues, challenge conventional thinking and give a voice to people working for positive social change.

New initiative invites socially responsible companies to pledge practical action on financial security and opportunity while supporting the wider campaign to prevent poverty London, 12 October 2026 – Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) is launching Poverty Prevention Partners, a new initiative bringing together socially responsible businesses committed to taking practical action to help prevent poverty and unnecessary financial hardship. The scheme is built around four simple principles: Pledge. Act. Report. Support. Participating businesses will sign a Poverty Prevention Partner Pledge, commit to at least one meaningful poverty-prevention action each year, report on what they have achieved and financially support TAP's wider work to make poverty prevention a national priority. In return, participating businesses will be able to use the Poverty Prevention Partner designation and logo and become part of a growing network of businesses and organisations working for practical change. Tom Burgess, Chief Executive of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: “Government has an essential role in preventing poverty, but it cannot do it alone. Businesses make decisions every day that affect people's financial security—from pay and employment conditions to training, recruitment, pensions, procurement and support for local communities. “Poverty Prevention Partners is about recognising businesses that are prepared to do something practical. We don't want another badge that companies can simply buy. To become a Partner, you have to act.” Practical action, not box-ticking Businesses will be able to choose poverty-prevention actions appropriate to their size and circumstances. These could include paying the independently calculated Real Living Wage, improving employment security, creating apprenticeships and progression opportunities, recruiting people facing barriers to employment, providing financial wellbeing support, establishing employee hardship funds, improving pensions for lower-paid workers, paying small suppliers promptly or supporting disadvantaged entrepreneurs and local communities. The scheme is deliberately flexible so that small businesses can participate alongside major employers. Tom Burgess continued: “A ten-person business obviously cannot do what a company employing 10,000 people can do. What matters is that both can make a genuine contribution. One company might create an apprenticeship. Another might improve support for employees facing financial difficulty. Another might recruit people who have struggled to get into work. Collectively, relatively small actions can have a very significant impact.” Preventing poverty is good economics The initiative forms part of TAP's wider campaign to shift the national debate from managing poverty to preventing it. TAP argues that poverty prevention is not simply a social responsibility. Financial insecurity, homelessness, ill health, unemployment and debt can create substantial costs for individuals, businesses, public services and taxpayers. Its Prevention Dividend policy proposes that Government should consider both the future public costs avoided and additional prosperity created by successful preventative action. TAP believes business should be part of the same conversation. “For business, poverty prevention can mean employees who are more financially secure, better skills and progression, stronger communities, healthier local economies and more people able to participate productively,” Tom Burgess said. “This isn't anti-business. Quite the opposite. Successful, responsible businesses are essential to creating the prosperity that ultimately prevents poverty.” Target: 100 Poverty Prevention Partners TAP's initial ambition is to recruit 100 businesses to the initiative. Partners will make an annual or monthly contribution to TAP, with suggested contributions scaled according to company size so that participation remains accessible to smaller businesses. The contribution level will not determine Partner status. Every participating company will make the same fundamental commitment: take practical action to prevent poverty. Partners will be invited to share their experiences, participate in relevant policy discussions and events, and connect with other responsible businesses, charities, campaigners and specialists through TAP and the wider Real Agenda Network. TAP also plans to highlight examples of effective business action so that successful ideas can be shared and adopted by other employers. An invitation to business TAP is now seeking an initial group of Founding Poverty Prevention Partners ahead of the programme's wider rollout. Tom Burgess concluded: “We want to demonstrate what can happen when business, government and civil society stop treating poverty as somebody else's problem. Imagine 100 businesses making 100 practical commitments—better pay, better jobs, apprenticeships, financial support, opportunities for excluded people, stronger local procurement or support for entrepreneurs. Then imagine that becoming 500 businesses, and eventually thousands. Poverty isn't inevitable. Business can help prevent it. Make the pledge. Take action. Help create change.” ENDS Notes to editors Poverty Prevention Partners is an initiative of Taxpayers Against Poverty. Participating businesses sign the Poverty Prevention Partner Pledge, undertake at least one recognised poverty-prevention action each year, report their progress and financially support TAP's wider poverty-prevention work. Companies that meet the requirements can use the Poverty Prevention Partner designation and logo during their participation in the scheme. For businesses interested in becoming a Founding Poverty Prevention Partner media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against Poverty Info: info@taxpayersagainstpoverty.org Media: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against Poverty Taxpayers against Poverty is an independent, non-partisan organisation campaigning for practical policies that prevent poverty, reduce inequality and unnecessary financial hardship, and create better long-term value for taxpayers. Its current policy programme includes The Prevention Dividend, Connected Britain, Green Prosperity, Location, Location plus tax reform, housing, transport, and inclusive economic growth. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Network, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life; The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing; Purple Shoots which helps people excluded from mainstream finance start sustainable microbusinesses by providing small ethical loans alongside practical support and mentoring, creating income, independence and stronger local economies as well as Real Agenda Radio (RAR) which is the network’s media platform, providing podcasts, interviews and commentary that amplify under-reported issues, challenge conventional thinking and give a voice to people working for positive social change.

London 8 October 2026: Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) welcomes proposals to boost jobs, enterprise and economic growth—but questions a political agenda that appears to prioritise inherited wealth over preventing poverty. Conservative Party leader, Kemi Badenoch's Conference speech offered a clear indication of the direction in which she wants to take her party. Lower taxes, less regulation, reduced welfare spending and greater emphasis on individual responsibility were central themes. There were some welcome ideas, particularly around youth employment, apprenticeships, economic growth and removing barriers to home ownership. These deserve serious consideration, regardless of which political party proposes them. But the headline announcement raises a fundamental question about priorities. At a time when around 14 million people are living in poverty, is reducing inheritance tax for a relatively small number of wealthier families really the most pressing reform Britain needs? Badenoch proposed exempting family homes from inheritance tax and increasing the allowance for other inherited assets. Fewer than 5% of estates (estimated at 30,000 people) currently pay inheritance tax, and her proposals would reduce that number substantially further. People argue that individuals should be able to pass on the wealth they have accumulated without facing additional taxation. That is a legitimate position, and protecting ordinary families from disproportionate taxation deserves consideration. But there is another side to this argument. Millions of people have little prospect of accumulating substantial wealth to pass on because they are struggling to afford housing, energy, food and other essentials today. Tom Burgess, Chief Executive of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: "There is something deeply troubling about a political agenda whose headline offer is further tax relief for families inheriting valuable property, while proposing to reduce spending on support for people experiencing financial hardship. "We should be asking how Britain can create greater prosperity and opportunity for everyone, not simply how those who already have substantial assets can retain more of them. If we are serious about reducing poverty, every major tax and spending proposal should be judged by whether it improves financial security, increases opportunity and prevents people falling into hardship." The contrast with Andy Burnham's recent conference speech was striking. Burnham sought to connect housing, care, living costs, opportunity and regional prosperity within a broader argument about building a Preventative State. TAP welcomed that direction while making clear that the Government must now demonstrate how it will deliver and fund its ambitions. Badenoch offered a more explicitly ideological vision centred on lower taxes, smaller government and individual responsibility. But the speech also contained a long list of individual commitments, accompanied by extensive criticism of Labour, Reform and other political opponents. There is nothing wrong with robust political disagreement. Opposition parties have an important responsibility to challenge Government. However, TAP believes Britain would benefit from more emphasis on constructive solutions and less on political point-scoring. The real test of any party's economic programme should be whether its proposals work together to reduce poverty, improve living standards, create opportunity and strengthen long-term prosperity. Tom Burgess concluded: "But the headline message from this conference leaves us asking a fundamental question: why should reducing taxes for families inheriting substantial property wealth take priority over improving the prospects of millions who are struggling financially today? Britain needs more than a collection of tax cuts and spending reductions. It needs an integrated economic strategy that creates prosperity, shares opportunity and prevents poverty.” Ends For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against PovertyTaxpayers against Poverty is an independent, non-partisan organisation campaigning for practical policies that prevent poverty, reduce inequality and unnecessary financial hardship, and create better long-term value for taxpayers. Its current policy programme includes The Prevention Dividend, Connected Britain, Green Prosperity, Location, Location plus tax reform, housing, transport, and inclusive economic growth. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Network, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life; The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing; Purple Shoots which helps people excluded from mainstream finance start sustainable microbusinesses by providing small ethical loans alongside practical support and mentoring, creating income, independence and stronger local economies as well as Real Agenda Radio (RAR) which is the network’s media platform, providing podcasts, interviews and commentary that amplify under-reported issues, challenge conventional thinking and give a voice to people working for positive social change.

Media Comment: London 1 October 2026: Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) welcomes much of the direction set out by Prime Minister Andy Burnham in his first Party Conference speech as Prime Minister. Although TAP is independent and non-partisan, there is significant alignment between several of the ambitions outlined by the Prime Minister and the agenda TAP has been developing around poverty prevention, reducing the cost of living and building prosperity that reaches every part of Britain. The Prime Minister spoke about making essentials such as housing, water and energy more affordable; expanding council housing; tackling poor-quality rented homes; creating a National Care Service; increasing opportunity for young people; strengthening regional economies and restoring confidence in Britain's ability to solve difficult problems. He also argued that Britain needs to move beyond political point-scoring towards problem-solving and seek greater cross-party support for long-term reform. (The Labour Party) Those are important ambitions. They also build on the Prime Minister's earlier commitment to a Preventative State—an idea that sits particularly closely with TAP's central argument: Britain must become much better at preventing poverty rather than continually paying to manage its consequences. From managing problems to preventing them The Prime Minister's emphasis on housing provides a good example. Poor-quality, insecure and unaffordable housing doesn't simply create a housing problem. It can contribute to debt, poor health, homelessness, disrupted education and economic insecurity. Preventing those problems before they reach crisis is better for people and potentially better for taxpayers. The same principle applies to energy, transport, employment, skills and social care. That is why TAP has developed The Prevention Dividend—our proposal that government should assess preventative investment not simply according to what it costs today, but also according to the future public expenditure it can avoid and the additional prosperity it can create. Costs avoided + prosperity created = The Prevention Dividend. The Prime Minister's conference agenda also overlaps with TAP's wider work on Green Prosperity, Connected Britain, housing, inclusive enterprise and reducing the cost of living. His call to restore optimism and stop running Britain down is also welcome. TAP has consistently argued that Britain has enormous assets—its people, businesses, universities, institutions, infrastructure and accumulated wealth—and should be much more confident about its ability to build a fairer and more prosperous future. But ambition isn't enough. There is, however, an important distinction between setting a direction and changing people's lives. Delivery is now the test. The Government faces difficult fiscal choices, and some of the Prime Minister's larger proposals are intended for the next Parliament rather than immediate implementation. His proposed National Care Service, for example, is a longer-term commitment. (The Labour Party) People struggling with rent, energy, food, transport and other essential costs cannot live on long-term aspirations alone. TAP therefore wants to see the preventative principle embedded much more deeply into the machinery of government now. We are proposing a Prevention Test for major government decisions, a Treasury function capable of identifying the cross-departmental financial returns from prevention, and measurable pilots demonstrating where earlier intervention can reduce future costs. We also believe the Government needs to be prepared to undertake structural reforms rather than repeatedly reaching for short-term fixes. That includes serious reform of Britain's outdated property-tax system, greater investment in regional connectivity, building homes around existing infrastructure, reducing household energy requirements and creating more routes into secure employment and enterprise. An opportunity for a different kind of politics One aspect of the Prime Minister's speech deserves particular support from across the political spectrum. He said he wanted to seek cross-party support for his Plan for Britain and argued that Westminster too often prizes “point-scoring over problem-solving.” (The Labour Party) Poverty prevention should be exactly the kind of issue around which Parliament can work differently. TAP's Prioritise Poverty Prevention Pledge has already been signed by 32 MPs from five political parties—including Andy Burnham before he became Prime Minister. Those MPs will disagree about many policies. That is democracy. But they have agreed on an important principle: government should give greater priority to preventing poverty and inequality. We now want to see that principle translated into measurable action. Tom Burgess, Chief Executive of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: “There was much in the Prime Minister's speech that we welcome. The emphasis on affordable essentials, housing, opportunity, regional prosperity and long-term reform is closely aligned with the agenda TAP has been developing. But the most important word now is delivery.” “The Government has an opportunity to move Britain away from endlessly managing expensive social problems and towards preventing more of them in the first place. “That means being prepared to undertake serious reform, measure outcomes rather than announcements, and keep going when difficult changes encounter opposition. TAP will support good ideas, challenge Government where we believe it should go further, and continue putting practical solutions on the table.” The Prime Minister ended his conference speech by arguing that Britain needs “honesty, ideas and a clear direction.” (The Labour Party) TAP agrees. There is reason for optimism about the direction now being discussed. The challenge is to turn that optimism into lower living costs, greater opportunity, less poverty and prosperity that is genuinely shared. That is how the success of the Preventative State should ultimately be judged. For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against PovertyTaxpayers against Poverty is an independent, non-partisan organisation campaigning for practical policies that prevent poverty, reduce inequality and unnecessary financial hardship, and create better long-term value for taxpayers. Its current policy programme includes The Prevention Dividend, tax reform, housing, transport, Green Prosperity and inclusive economic growth. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Ltd, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life as well as The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing.

TAP TALK is TAP's regular mailing to our 10,000 supporters. Get your copy direct to your inbox by signing up on our home page 30 September 2026 Yesterday, the Prime Minister told the Labour conference and the country that Britain isn't perfect. But he promised people "will believe again, we will hope again". We know the cost of living remains too high. Millions experience financial insecurity. Infrastructure needs investment. Housing is unaffordable for too many, and inequality holds people and communities back. But there is another side to Britain that we don't talk about enough. We are a wealthy, innovative and extraordinarily capable country. We have world-class universities, science and research, creative industries, successful businesses and entrepreneurs, great cultural institutions, an extraordinary voluntary sector and communities full of people wanting to make things better. Our problem isn't that Britain lacks talent, wealth or ideas. It is that we don't always use them well enough—or share the prosperity they create widely enough. And that is something we can change. Britain can be ambitious again. At Taxpayers Against Poverty, we don't believe campaigning against poverty should simply mean describing what's wrong. We want to talk about what Britain could become: Fewer people falling into poverty because we prevent it before it happens. Work and enterprise rewarded, with prosperity shared more fairly. Affordable homes built alongside the transport and infrastructure people need. Clean energy delivering warmer homes, lower bills and new industries. Towns and cities connected to opportunity. Entrepreneurs able to succeed regardless of where they started. A tax system that supports productive work while asking accumulated wealth and land to contribute fairly. This isn't about lowering our ambitions because times are difficult. It's about raising them. From managing decline to creating prosperity For too long, Britain's political conversation has focused on what we cannot afford. We think there is a better question: What could Britain achieve if we invested intelligently in preventing problems and creating prosperity? That is why TAP has developed The Prevention Dividend. Instead of waiting until people become homeless, sick, indebted or economically excluded and then spending billions dealing with the consequences, government should invest earlier where prevention works: Better housing and transport. Skills and enterprise. Warmer homes. Fairer taxation. Greater economic opportunity. The return isn't simply lower future public expenditure. It is prosperity created. We want Britain to lead by example Imagine Britain showing that a modern economy doesn't have to choose between economic success and social justice: Encourage enterprise and reduce inequality. Build wealth and share opportunity. Tackle climate change and lower household costs. Maintain strong public finances and prevent poverty. Britain could become an international example of how innovation, enterprise and investment can go hand in hand with ensuring nobody is unnecessarily left behind. That's a Britain worth talking up. But positive change doesn't happen because somebody writes a good policy paper. We have to campaign for it. Powerful interests defend the status quo. Governments face immediate pressures. Long-term reforms get postponed. Good ideas disappear beneath tomorrow's headlines. That's why TAP matters. We take practical proposals directly to Government and Parliament. The Prevention Dividend, property-tax reform, Connected Britain, My Home Station, Green Prosperity and inclusive enterprise form one integrated agenda: Prevent poverty. Build prosperity. We don't expect Government to accept every proposal we make. But we will keep pushing, questioning, proposing and building support for reforms capable of making people's lives materially better. And you make that possible. Help us build the campaign More than 10,000 people have joined the TAP movement. To everyone who has donated already: thank you. Your support has enabled a small organisation to develop serious policy proposals, put them before decision-makers, engage MPs and build collaborations. Now we need to increase that pressure. We want to campaign for a Britain confident enough to reform what isn't working, invest in its future and ensure greater prosperity reaches everyone. If you want to help us make that case, please support the campaign today. Become a Prosperity Partner A regular gift of £5, £10 or £20 a month gives us the dependable income we need to plan ahead and keep our campaigns moving. Or: Make a one-off donation Britain has extraordinary strengths. Let's stop allowing our national conversation to be dominated by everything we cannot do. Let's talk Britain up—and then do the work required to make that optimism justified. With best wishes, Tom BurgessChief ExecutiveTaxpayers Against Poverty P.S. Optimism without action changes nothing. TAP wants to turn positive ideas into practical reform—reducing the cost of living, preventing poverty and creating prosperity that reaches every part of Britain. Please become a Prosperity Partner today and help us make it happen.

Calls to weaken the pension triple lock miss the bigger question: if Government needs more revenue, it should look to accumulated wealth rather than weakening an important protection against pensioner hardship London 15 September 2026: Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) has urged the Government to resist calls to weaken or abolish the State Pension triple lock simply as a means of reducing public spending, arguing that doing so would run counter to the Prime Minister’s ambition to build a Preventative State. The debate has intensified following new earnings figures which suggest the State Pension is likely to rise by around 3.9% next April under the triple lock, which guarantees an annual increase by the highest of average earnings growth, inflation or 2.5%. Critics argue that the mechanism is becoming increasingly expensive and unpredictable. The Institute for Fiscal Studies says the triple lock has materially increased both the generosity and cost of the State Pension, while the Resolution Foundation has called for its replacement with a long-term earnings link. TAP accepts that the long-term structure of the State Pension should be kept under review, particularly to ensure fairness between generations. But it argues that cutting pension protection principally to save the Treasury money would be the wrong starting point. Tom Burgess, Chief Executive of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: “The triple lock exists for a reason. Millions of pensioners depend heavily on the State Pension and many have very little financial flexibility when food, heating, housing and other essential costs rise. Protecting their income is an example of preventative policy. It helps stop people falling into poverty rather than waiting until they are struggling and then paying to deal with the consequences. That is exactly the principle behind the Preventative State. As TAP continually argues: it makes more sense to prevent poverty than manage it.” The Government itself says the triple lock helps ensure pensioners’ incomes keep pace with living costs and wages. More than 12 million pensioners received an increase of up to £575 this year following the 4.8% uprating in April. Protect the poorest pensioners—but recognise that not every pensioner is poor TAP believes the debate should avoid presenting all pensioners as having the same financial circumstances. Some pensioners have substantial property, investment and pension wealth. Others live almost entirely on the State Pension and associated benefits. That distinction matters. Tom Burgess continued: “There is a perfectly legitimate debate to be had about the long-term sustainability and design of the triple lock. But we should not confuse that with the question of whether Britain can afford to protect pensioners from poverty. If reform is considered, the first test must be whether people on low and modest retirement incomes remain properly protected. Saving money by allowing the poorest pensioners to become poorer would be a false economy.” TAP argues that allowing pensioner incomes to fall behind essential living costs can create costs elsewhere through increased poverty, ill health, debt, housing insecurity and greater demand on public services. That reflects TAP’s Prevention Dividend principle: government should consider not merely the immediate cost of preventing hardship, but the future public expenditure avoided, and economic and social benefits created by doing so. If Government needs money, ask where Britain’s wealth has gone TAP says the more fundamental issue is how Government should raise the revenue required to fund decent pensions, public services and investment without continually increasing the burden on ordinary working households. Britain is a wealthy country, but that wealth is distributed very unevenly. TAP argues that much of today’s private wealth has not been created in isolation. Businesses depend upon employees, customers, infrastructure, education, healthcare, legal systems, public investment and the wider society in which they operate. In other words, wealth is collectively enabled even when its ownership becomes highly concentrated. Tom Burgess said: “If the Treasury needs additional revenue, we should have a much bigger conversation about where that money should come from. Rather than starting with pensioners or continually taxing people’s wages, Government should look more seriously at the enormous stock of wealth that our economy and society have helped create but which is now disproportionately concentrated in the hands of a relatively small number of people. TAP has consistently argued for taxing productive work less and accumulated wealth more fairly. That includes serious reform of the taxation of land, property and very substantial wealth. “The objective shouldn’t be to punish people for being successful. It should be to ensure that the prosperity we collectively help create contributes fairly towards the society that made it possible.” The wrong argument TAP believes the debate should therefore move beyond a simplistic choice between protecting pensioners and protecting taxpayers. Tom Burgess concluded: “We shouldn’t set younger people against older people. Both generations are facing real economic pressures, and neither benefits from an economy in which wealth and opportunity become increasingly concentrated. The question shouldn’t simply be: how much can we save by weakening the triple lock? It should be: how do we ensure everybody can have a financially secure retirement—and how do we fund that fairly? “A Government committed to prevention should be extremely cautious about removing something that helps prevent poverty simply because prevention appears expensive on today’s balance sheet. Preventing poverty costs money. Allowing poverty to happen costs money too. “That is the calculation Government needs to make.” ENDS For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against Poverty Taxpayers against Poverty (TAP) is an independent, non-partisan organisation campaigning for practical policies that prevent poverty, reduce inequality and unnecessary financial hardship, and create better long-term value for taxpayers. Its current policy programme includes The Prevention Dividend, tax reform, housing, transport, Green Prosperity and inclusive economic growth. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Ltd, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life as well as The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing.

Delivering 1.2 Million Homes Through Station-Centred Development Prepared by: Taxpayers Against Poverty as part of series of policy briefs submitted to government and selected MPs Date: July 2026 Executive Summary Britain faces a chronic housing shortage, rising housing costs, growing regional inequality, and increasing pressure on infrastructure and transport systems. At the same time, vast areas of underutilised land exist within walking distance of railway stations outside major cities — locations that are inherently sustainable, connected, and economically productive. This paper proposes a bold national strategy to deliver up to 1.2 million new homes through a coordinated programme of rail-linked development focused on land within approximately 800 metres (10 minutes’ walk) of railway stations outside major urban centres. The proposal would combine: · strategic land assembly by local authorities, · transport-oriented development, · infrastructure-led regeneration, · public land value capture, · and long-term community planning. Rather than uncontrolled sprawl, the strategy would create compact, walkable, mixed-income communities linked directly to employment and public transport. The objective is not simply to build more housing.It is to: · reduce housing costs, · improve regional growth, · strengthen local economies, · reduce car dependency, · support public transport viability, · and create more balanced national prosperity. 1. The National Challenge Britain’s housing crisis is now directly impacting: · economic productivity, · family formation, · labour mobility, · public health, · poverty levels, · and intergenerational fairness. Key pressures include: · unaffordable housing costs, · insufficient social and affordable housing, · weak regional investment, · declining town centres, · infrastructure imbalance, · and excessive concentration of growth in a small number of major cities. Meanwhile, many towns with existing railway infrastructure remain significantly underdeveloped. This represents a major missed opportunity. 2. The Core Proposal A National Station Growth Programme The government would establish a long-term national programme to support development around railway stations outside major cities. Core Target Deliver up to 1.2 million homes over 10–15 years through development within walking distance of qualifying railway stations. Geographic Focus · Existing railway stations outside major metropolitan cores · Small towns · Market towns · commuter settlements · secondary urban centres · underutilised rail corridors Development Radius Primary focus: · land within approximately 800 metres of stations · equivalent to around a 10-minute walk This aligns with emerging planning analysis around sustainable station-led development. (Lichfields) 3. Why Railway Station Development Makes Sense Economic Benefits Rail-linked housing: · improves labour mobility, · supports regional productivity, · increases access to employment, · and strengthens local high streets and services. Research cited in planning analysis suggests rail-station growth could unlock housing at significant scale in economically productive regions. (Lichfields) Environmental Benefits Station-centred communities: · reduce car dependency, · reduce congestion, · lower emissions, · and support public transport viability. This represents a more sustainable alternative to low-density sprawl. Social Benefits Done properly, rail-linked growth can: · create mixed-income communities, · improve access to affordable housing, · support younger families, · and regenerate struggling towns. 4. Local Authority Land Acquisition Model Strategic Public Land Assembly Local authorities would be empowered to: · identify suitable land around stations, · acquire land through negotiated purchase or existing compulsory purchase mechanisms, · masterplan development zones, · and retain long-term strategic control. Why Public Land Assembly Matters Currently, large increases in land value generated by planning permission are overwhelmingly captured privately. Under this model: · local authorities retain greater control, · infrastructure can be planned coherently, · speculative land banking is reduced, · and a greater proportion of uplift can fund: o transport, o schools, o GP surgeries, o parks, o and affordable housing. This follows successful international models of transport-led development. 5. The Housing Model Mixed Tenure Communities Development should include: · affordable housing, · social housing, · market housing, · rental housing, · later-life housing, · and key worker housing. Density Principles Typical density: · 40–70 dwellings per hectare depending on local character and transport capacity. This is consistent with emerging National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)thinking around higher density near stations. (Lichfields) Design Principles Development should prioritise: · walkability, · green space, · local services, · cycling, · community facilities, · and strong architectural standards. The aim should be beautiful, sustainable communities rather than high-density dormitory estates. 6. Infrastructure and Transport Integration Rail Capacity Development should be tied to: · increased service frequency, · station upgrades, · integrated bus links, · and active travel infrastructure. One major advantage of this strategy is that additional population density helps improve rail viability and passenger demand. Planning analysis suggests many lower-frequency stations currently suffer from a “frequency trap” where insufficient local population suppresses service improvements. (Lichfields) New housing growth could help justify: · improved timetables, · greater rail investment, · and stronger local economies. 7. Funding and Delivery Mechanisms Potential Funding Sources · Public infrastructure bonds · UK Infrastructure Bank · Pension fund investment · Land value capture · Joint ventures · Development corporations · Strategic housing funds Delivery Vehicles Potential structures include: · Local Development Corporations · Combined Authorities · Regional Growth Partnerships · Public-private joint ventures · Community land trusts 8. Economic Impact A national station-led growth programme could: · increase housing supply substantially, · reduce housing pressure, · support economic growth, · create construction employment, · strengthen regional towns, · increase rail usage, · and stimulate private investment. Importantly, it would shift Britain toward infrastructure-led strategic planning rather than fragmented speculative development. 9. Political and Strategic Advantages This policy has the potential to unite: · economic growth, · housing delivery, · environmental sustainability, · regional regeneration, · and public transport investment. It avoids the false choice between: · protecting communities, · and building homes. Instead, it focuses growth in the most logical and sustainable locations. This could become a defining long-term national infrastructure and housing strategy for Britain. 10. Conclusion Britain cannot solve its housing crisis through piecemeal development alone. A more ambitious approach is required. Railway stations already provide: · connectivity, · infrastructure, · economic access, · and sustainable transport. By focusing strategic growth around them, Britain has an opportunity to: · build up to 1.2 million homes, · revitalise towns, · reduce inequality, · support public transport, · and create more balanced national growth. The opportunity now exists to move beyond reactive planning and toward a coherent national vision for housing and infrastructure. A station-centred development strategy could become one of the most transformative and practical housing policies of the next generation. Sources and contextual references: · Lichfields Planning Analysis · UK National Planning Policy Framework · CLA Planning Reform Analysis · RIBA NPPF Overview For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against PovertyTaxpayers against Poverty is a UK-based independent advocacy group dedicated to tackling poverty, inequality, and economic injustice TAP seeks to influence national and local policy by promoting practical economic proposals that have a positive effect on reducing poverty and unnecessary financial hardship using a direct approach to decision makers and other influencers. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Ltd, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life as well as The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing.

The Prevention Dividend Better for People. Better for Public Services. Better for Taxpayers. Submitted by: Taxpayers Against Poverty Contact: Tom Burgess, Chief Executive Date: 8 September 2026 The Proposal Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) welcomes the Government's ambition to build a Preventative State. The Autumn Budget provides an opportunity to begin turning that principle into practical economic policy. Britain spends enormous sums responding to problems after they have become crises: homelessness, poor health, problem debt, unemployment, educational disadvantage and financial insecurity. Much of this spending is essential. But government should ask a second question: What investment today could prevent these problems arising tomorrow? TAP calls the economic and social return generated by successful prevention The Prevention Dividend: Costs avoided + prosperity created We are not proposing a major new spending programme. We are asking HM Treasury to establish a practical framework for identifying, testing and measuring where preventative investment can improve lives while reducing future public expenditure and increasing economic prosperity. Why Prevention Matters to the Treasury Poverty does not operate within departmental boundaries. · High housing costs can lead to debt. · Debt can damage health. · Poor health can affect employment. · Falling income increases housing insecurity. · Children growing up within that instability may experience poorer educational outcomes. Government then pays through different budgets: welfare, NHS services, housing, education, debt support and potentially temporary accommodation. Each department sees a different cost. The family experiences one interconnected crisis. There is therefore a structural weakness in conventional government accounting: the department paying for prevention is often not the department receiving the eventual saving. A council may invest in better housing while the NHS benefits from improved health. Education spending today may reduce future welfare or criminal justice expenditure. Transport investment may cost one department while increasing employment, productivity and tax receipts elsewhere. The immediate cost is visible. The long-term benefits are dispersed across government. HM Treasury is uniquely placed to see across those departmental boundaries. What We Are Asking the Treasury to Do 1. Introduce a Prevention Test Major spending decisions and policies should increasingly be assessed against their preventative impact. The Test should ask: Will this increase or reduce poverty and financial insecurity? What future public expenditure could it prevent? Which department pays now and which may benefit later? Could it improve employment, health, housing or economic independence? What additional economic activity and tax revenues could result? What is the likely return over five, ten and twenty years? The objective is not another bureaucratic process. It is to ensure that government considers the cost of not preventing a problem. 2. Establish a Small Treasury Prevention Function HM Treasury should establish a small Prevention Unit, or designate an existing Treasury team, to coordinate this work across government. Its role would be to identify promising preventative investments, develop consistent methods for measuring cross-departmental benefits and evaluate whether earlier intervention genuinely produces better long-term value. It would add one important question to Treasury decision-making: "What future costs does this investment prevent?" 3. Launch Prevention Investment Pilots Government should start small and establish evidence. Initial pilots could include: · Homelessness: intervene before households lose their homes and compare the cost with temporary accommodation and subsequent support avoided. · Warm homes: improve inefficient homes and measure changes in energy bills, health and household financial resilience. · Debt: intervene at the first signs of serious financial distress rather than after debt becomes unmanageable. · Early years: test targeted interventions in areas of entrenched disadvantage and measure longer-term outcomes. · Employment and transport: improve connectivity where poor transport limits access to employment and measure effects on jobs, earnings and benefit dependency. Each pilot should establish a baseline, measure outcomes across departments and undergo independent evaluation. The Economic Opportunity The Prevention Dividend is not simply about saving public money. Its larger potential is creating prosperity. · A healthier population can be more productive. · Better education can increase lifetime earnings. · Reliable infrastructure expands labour markets. · Affordable housing improves mobility and financial security. · Lower essential household costs increase disposable income. · Successful businesses create jobs and tax revenues. That is why the Prevention Dividend has two components: Expenditure avoided + prosperity created. This principle can be applied across government. TAP's wider policy programme demonstrates the approach: Connected Britain connects people with employment and regional opportunity; Green Prosperity combines lower energy costs with warmer homes and skilled jobs; housing and My Home Station link affordable homes with transport and employment; tax reform seeks to reward productive work and investment; and enterprise policies can help people build income and economic independence. These are different policies, but they share the same objective: Create the conditions in which more people become financially secure and fewer people require government support. From Cost This Year to Value Over a Generation If the initial programme demonstrates value, TAP proposes that HM Treasury progressively develop a National Prevention Account. This would seek to measure: Investment in prevention against future public expenditure avoided plus additional economic value created. Government already undertakes long-term appraisal of infrastructure, pensions, borrowing and investment. Preventative investment deserves similarly rigorous analysis. The aim is to move government thinking: from cost this year to value over a generation. Our Budget Ask TAP asks the Chancellor to make four initial commitments in the Autumn Budget: 1. Make poverty prevention a cross-government objective. 2. Ask HM Treasury to develop and pilot a Prevention Test and establish responsibility for prevention analysis within the Treasury. 3. Launch a small number of measurable Prevention Investment Pilots during 2027. 4. Report the results and develop proposals for measuring a National Prevention Dividend ahead of the next Spending Review. These measures can initially be developed largely through existing analytical capacity and programmes. The immediate ask is therefore primarily about changing how government evaluates investment, rather than committing to substantial new expenditure. Where pilots demonstrate credible net Exchequer savings or wider economic returns, Government can then consider scaling successful interventions. Conclusion This proposal is not about weakening the safety net. People experiencing hardship must always receive support. It is about having a greater ambition: fewer people should need crisis support because fewer people reach crisis point. That means moving from treatment towards prevention, from departmental costs towards whole-government outcomes, and from managing poverty towards creating prosperity. The question for HM Treasury should therefore not simply be: How much will prevention cost? It should also be: How much is our failure to prevent poverty already costing us? Finding that answer—and acting upon it—is The Prevention Dividend. Tom BurgessChief ExecutiveTaxpayers Against Poverty Supporting document available: The Prevention Dividend – Why Preventing Poverty Is Better for People, Better for Public Services and Better for Taxpayers For more information and media enquiries: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against PovertyTaxpayers against Poverty is a UK-based independent advocacy group dedicated to tackling poverty, inequality, and economic injustice TAP seeks to influence national and local policy by promoting practical economic proposals that have a positive effect on reducing poverty and unnecessary financial hardship using a direct approach to decision makers and other influencers. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Network, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life; The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing as well as Purple Shoots which tackles poverty, unemployment, social isolation and financial exclusion through encouraging and building entrepreneurship and independence, through microfinance.

New parliamentary session offers an opportunity to turn the Prime Minister’s “Preventative State” from an ambition into practical government policy London 31 August 2026. As MPs return to Westminster on Tuesday 1 September, Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) is calling on the new Government to make preventing poverty, reducing the cost of living and improving financial security central tests of success in its first full parliamentary session under Prime Minister Andy Burnham. The House of Commons returns on 1 September, with the Prime Minister due to face MPs at PMQs the following day. (parliament.uk) TAP has welcomed the Prime Minister’s commitment to building a “more preventative state” and his promise to invest in people’s success rather than continually paying for failure. It believes that principle should now extend across government—not just to homelessness and health, but to housing, taxation, transport, energy, education, employment and economic development. (Gov.UK) Tom Burgess, Chief Executive of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: “This is an exciting opportunity for a new Government and a new Prime Minister to change the way Britain thinks about poverty. For too long, governments have spent billions managing the consequences of poverty after people have reached crisis point. We support people after they become homeless, after debts become unmanageable, after poor housing damages their health and after disadvantage has become entrenched. Of course, that support must always be there. But surely the greater ambition should be to prevent as many people as possible from reaching crisis in the first place.” The economic case for prevention is already reflected in the Government’s own approach to rough sleeping. In announcing its new programme, the Government cited research estimating that a year of rough sleeping costs more than £20,000 per person compared with around £1,400 for a successful prevention intervention. (Gov.UK) TAP argues that the same economic thinking should be applied much more widely. Its new Prevention Dividend policy framework proposes that Government begins measuring not simply what preventative policies cost today, but the future public expenditure they avoid and the additional economic prosperity they create. TAP describes this as: Costs avoided + prosperity created = The Prevention Dividend. Tom Burgess continued: “The Prime Minister is right to talk about a Preventative State. Now we need to make it real. Housing policy can prevent homelessness. Better transport can connect people with employment. Energy efficiency can permanently reduce household bills. Education can prevent disadvantage becoming entrenched. A fairer tax system can reduce unnecessary pressure on household finances. A stronger productive economy can create the secure, properly rewarded work that is ultimately one of our best defences against poverty. These aren’t separate issues. They are all part of the same challenge.” The call comes as household finances remain under significant pressure. Consumer prices in June 2026 were more than 30% higher than in January 2021, while food prices had risen by more than 39% over the same period. The cost of living also continues to rank among the issues of greatest concern to the British public. (House of Commons Library) TAP welcomes the Government’s early measures to ease household costs but argues that the next stage must address the structural causes of financial insecurity rather than relying predominantly on temporary relief. Six Actions for a Preventative Government As Parliament returns, TAP is calling on the Government to: Make poverty prevention a cross-government objective, rather than leaving it principally to welfare policy. Introduce a Prevention Test for major policies and spending decisions. Establish a small Prevention Unit within HM Treasury to identify and measure the long-term returns from preventative investment. Launch Prevention Investment Pilots across areas including housing, energy, education, debt, employment and transport. Create a National Prevention Account, measuring future expenditure avoided and additional economic value created. Publish an annual Prevention Dividend, allowing taxpayers to see whether earlier intervention is improving lives and reducing future costs. TAP will use the new parliamentary session to intensify its engagement with MPs from all parties. Its Prioritise Poverty Prevention Pledge already has the support of more than 30 MPs across five political parties, and TAP will now seek substantially more parliamentary signatories. Its Prioritise Poverty Prevention Petition, backed by more than 10,000 people, will also be presented to the Prime Minister this autumn. Alongside the campaign, TAP and the Progressive Policy Unit will continue circulating practical policy proposals to MPs and Government covering tax reform, housing, transport, energy, enterprise and regional economic development. TAP is also expanding collaboration with other organisations through the Real Agenda Network, bringing together charities, campaigners, think tanks, specialists and other organisations working to reduce poverty and inequality while allowing each to retain its own identity and independence. Tom Burgess concluded: “This should be a session of Parliament about delivery. The Government has talked about reducing the cost of living and building a Preventative State. We welcome that direction and want to help turn those ambitions into practical policy. But prevention cannot become another political slogan. We need measurable action and we need to keep asking a very simple question of every major government decision: Will this help prevent poverty—or will we simply end up paying to manage its consequences later? TAP intends to keep asking that question throughout this Parliament.” ENDS For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against PovertyTaxpayers against Poverty is a UK-based independent advocacy group dedicated to tackling poverty, inequality, and economic injustice TAP seeks to influence national and local policy by promoting practical economic proposals that have a positive effect on reducing poverty and unnecessary financial hardship using a direct approach to decision makers and other influencers. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Network which brings together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving.This includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life as well as The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing.

Abolish Council Tax, Scrap Business Rates and Tax Land Instead London, 27 July 2026 – Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) today called for what it describes as Britain's biggest tax cut for ordinary households and businesses, centred on replacing Council Tax, Stamp Duty and Business Rates with a modern system of Land Value Tax. TAP believes the debate around tax reform has been dominated by the wrong question. Instead of asking, "How do we raise more tax?", Britain should be asking, "How do we reduce the tax burden on working people while creating a fairer and more productive economy?" According to TAP, Land Value Tax should not be presented as a new tax, but as the mechanism for abolishing two of Britain's least popular and most economically damaging taxes. An estimated 69% of the 27m UK housholds would benefit from a reduction in property taxes giving a boost to over 44m people. Those who own the more valuable land will pay more, these are mainly concentrated in South East. Tom Burgess, CEO of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: "It is very encouraging that the new Prime Minister has said publicly that he is in favour of Land Value Tax so we are looking forward to a positive indication that this will actually happen. There has definitely been more talk in the media, so people are warming to the idea" "For decades, Land Value Tax has been discussed as if it were another tax. That is the wrong conversation. This is actually Britain's biggest tax cut. It means abolishing Council Tax. It means abolishing Stamp Duty. It means abolishing Business Rates. It means reducing taxes on work and creating stronger local economies. The winners are ordinary households, small businesses, high streets and local communities." TAP argues that Council Tax has become one of Britain's most regressive taxes, placing an increasing burden on households regardless of their ability to pay. The organisation proposes: Immediate abolition of Council Tax for renters to give huge boost to cost of living pressures for lower income groups. Immediate abolition of Stamp Duty on house sales A phased replacement of Council Tax with a Land Value Tax paid by landowners rather than occupiers. Replacement of Business Rates with Land Value Tax, reducing costs for small businesses while encouraging productive use of land. TAP believes the reform would fundamentally change incentives across the economy. "Today we tax people for living in their homes, businesses for investing in their premises and entrepreneurs for creating jobs," Tom Burgess said. "Instead, we should tax the underlying land value that is largely created by society through public investment, planning permission and economic development." The organisation says the benefits extend far beyond taxation. A modern Land Value Tax system could: · Reduce the cost of living. · Lower operating costs for independent businesses. · Encourage housebuilding. · Discourage land banking and speculation. · Regenerate town centres. · Support manufacturing and productive investment. · Reduce inequality. · Strengthen local government finances. TAP is also calling for a significant expansion of fiscal devolution, allowing cities and regions to retain Land Value Tax revenues and invest directly in local priorities. Under the proposal, increases in land values created by public investment—such as new railway stations, tram systems or regeneration projects—would help fund further infrastructure rather than flowing entirely into private windfall gains. "This is how many successful cities around the world finance long-term growth," Tom Burgess said. "When public investment creates private land value, it is entirely reasonable that part of that value is reinvested for public benefit." TAP believes the reform should form part of a wider programme that includes: · Lower taxes on work. · Fairer taxation of wealth. · Affordable housing around transport hubs. · Greater powers for cities and regions. · Investment in transport infrastructure. · A stronger focus on wellbeing and inclusive growth. The organisation said the growing political interest in Land Value Tax provides a unique opportunity to move the debate forward. "The question is no longer whether Britain needs tax reform," Tom Burgess concluded. "The question is whether we have the courage to replace outdated taxes with a system that rewards work, supports enterprise, lowers the cost of living and creates prosperity that is shared more widely. This is not about creating a new tax. It is about creating a better Britain." Taxpayers Against Poverty will shortly publish a detailed roadmap setting out how Britain could transition from Council Tax, Stamp Duty and Business Rates to a modern Land Value Tax system over the next Parliament. TAP. is seeking to partner with other organisations seeking to reform property taxes ENDS For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against Poverty Taxpayers against Poverty is a UK-based independent advocacy group dedicated to tackling poverty, inequality, and economic injustice TAP seeks to influence national and local policy by promoting practical economic proposals that have a positive effect on reducing poverty and unnecessary financial hardship using a direct approach to decision makers and other influencers. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Ltd, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life as well as The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing.

TAP welcomes signs of a bold new agenda but warns that lasting reform will require courage, public support and resistance to vested interests London, 20 July 2026 – Taxpayers Against Poverty (TAP) today said the appointment of a new Prime Minister offers Britain a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape the country's economic and social future but warned that meaningful reform will only succeed if the Government remains bold in the face of inevitable opposition. The organisation said there are encouraging signs that the new administration is prepared to embrace many of the ideas that campaigners have long argued are essential to reducing poverty, inequality and the cost of living. These include reform of Council Tax, fairer taxation of wealth, greater investment in housing and transport infrastructure, stronger devolution, democratic renewal and a greater focus on inclusive economic growth. Tom Burgess, CEO of Taxpayers Against Poverty, said: "For the first time in many years there is genuine reason for optimism. Britain has an opportunity to move beyond simply managing decline and begin building a country that is fairer, more productive and offers greater opportunity for everyone. The early signs suggest there is a willingness to think more boldly about housing, taxation, infrastructure, democratic reform and economic renewal. Those are precisely the conversations Britain needs." However, TAP warned that ambitious reform will not come easily. History shows that proposals to modernise the economy and make the tax system fairer often face determined resistance from vested interests, sections of the media and those who benefit most from the status quo. "Every significant reform in Britain's history has attracted criticism," Tom Burgess said. "There will undoubtedly be pushback from some wealthy interests, sections of the media and political opponents who are comfortable with the current system. The real test of leadership will not be announcing bold ideas. It will be having the determination to deliver them." TAP believes any new economic programme must be built around a clear national mission: Prevent poverty. Reduce financial hardship. Create opportunity. The organisation argues that Britain has spent decades treating poverty as something to manage rather than something to prevent. "As a country we have become very good at responding to the consequences of poverty," Tom Burgess said. "What we have failed to do is address many of its causes. Preventing poverty should become one of the central tests of every major government decision. If a policy increases financial hardship, it should be reconsidered. If it reduces hardship and expands opportunity, it should be prioritised." TAP believes a successful programme for national renewal should include: Reducing the cost of living. Reforming Council Tax and Business Rates. Taxing work less and wealth more fairly. Building significantly more affordable homes. Investing in modern transport infrastructure. Giving greater powers and financial responsibility to cities and regions. Modernising Parliament and strengthening democracy. Measuring success through wellbeing alongside economic growth. The organisation said these reforms should not be viewed as isolated policies but as part of one connected vision for rebuilding Britain. "The public is looking for more than individual announcements," Tom Burgess added. "People want to know where the country is heading. They want a government with a vision, a coherent plan and the courage to see it through." Over recent months, Taxpayers Against Poverty has submitted a series of policy briefings to parliamentarians and advisers covering poverty prevention, tax reform, housing, infrastructure and democratic renewal. The organisation's Prioritise Poverty Prevention campaign now has the support of more than 10,000 supporters and 30 MPs from five political parties, demonstrating growing momentum behind the call for a prevention-first approach to public policy. Tom Burgess concluded: "Britain has a genuine opportunity to turn the page. But hope alone will not change the country. It will require leadership, persistence and the confidence to withstand those who will argue that meaningful reform is impossible. We believe it is possible. More importantly, we believe Britain cannot afford to miss this opportunity." ENDS For media enquiries, interviews, or comment: Tom Burgess, CEO, Taxpayers Against PovertyEmail: media@taxpayersagainstpovery.org Website: www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk About Taxpayers Against PovertyTaxpayers against Poverty is a UK-based independent advocacy group dedicated to tackling poverty, inequality, and economic injustice TAP seeks to influence national and local policy by promoting practical economic proposals that have a positive effect on reducing poverty and unnecessary financial hardship using a direct approach to decision makers and other influencers. TAP was founded by the late Rev Paul Nicolson and is led by Tom Burgess, author of From Here to Prosperity, a new political agenda for a sustainable economy and greater social justice, which proposes taxing wealth more and income less. TAP is part of Real Agenda Ltd, a not-for-profit social enterprise bringing together campaigns, research, media and public engagement to tackle poverty, inequality and the barriers preventing people from thriving, this includes Compassion in Politics which seeks to bring more honesty, respect and compassion into political life as well as The Progressive Policy Unit (PPU) which develops practical, evidence-based proposals on poverty prevention, economic fairness, taxation, public services and social wellbeing.

A Poverty Prevention Strategy for Warmer Homes, Lower Bills and a Cleaner Economy Prepared by: Taxpayers Against Poverty July 2026 Purpose: To align Britain’s transition to Net Zero with the prevention of poverty, lower living costs and stronger regional prosperity. Executive Summary Britain should not be forced to choose between tackling climate change and tackling poverty. The right policies can do both. Green Prosperity proposes a national programme to reduce household energy use, expand clean power, create skilled jobs and ensure that the benefits of the transition are shared fairly. Its central principle is that climate policy should lower costs and improve economic security for people on low and modest incomes, rather than asking them to carry a disproportionate share of the transition. The initial priority would be a ten-year, area-by-area programme to upgrade Britain’s homes, beginning with households experiencing fuel poverty and communities with the least energy-efficient housing. Improvements would include insulation, draught-proofing, ventilation, solar panels, heat pumps where suitable, smart controls and access to shared or community energy. The programme would be supported by a Climate Poverty Test, requiring every major climate and energy policy to assess its effects on household bills, fuel poverty, employment, inequality and regional prosperity before implementation. Green Prosperity would help Britain reduce emissions while creating warmer homes, lower and more stable bills, better health, skilled employment and less dependence on volatile international energy markets. It would turn Net Zero from something people are asked to pay for into a programme from which millions of households can directly benefit. 1. The Problem Britain’s energy and climate debate has become trapped between two incomplete positions. One argues that rapid decarbonisation must proceed regardless of its immediate social cost. The other presents Net Zero primarily as an expensive burden on households and businesses. Neither approach offers a credible long-term answer. Climate change is already imposing economic and social costs through flooding, overheating, disrupted food production, damaged infrastructure and rising insurance risks. At the same time, poorly designed climate policies can place additional costs on households least able to absorb them. The challenge is therefore not whether Britain should pursue cleaner energy. It is how the transition is designed, who pays for it and who receives the benefits. Energy remains a major source of financial insecurity. Official projections indicate that around 2.36 million English households were in fuel poverty in 2025, while low-income households were expected to spend an average of 14.9% of their income on required energy costs. (GOV.UK) Energy prices also remain volatile. Ofgem’s price cap for a typical dual-fuel household paying by Direct Debit is £1,862 a year for July to September 2026, following a 13% quarterly increase. (Ofgem) Temporary bill support can prevent immediate hardship, but it does not solve the underlying problem. A poorly insulated home remains expensive to heat year after year. A household that depends on volatile fossil-fuel markets remains vulnerable to the next international price shock. Britain needs to move from repeatedly subsidising high energy costs to permanently reducing the amount of energy households need to buy. That is poverty prevention. 2. Why Energy Policy Is Poverty Policy Poverty is not determined by income alone. It is also shaped by the unavoidable costs a household must meet. A family may remain above the official poverty line on paper but experience serious hardship once rent, childcare, transport and energy costs are paid. High energy bills force difficult choices between heating, food, debt repayments and other essentials. Cold and inefficient homes can also contribute to poor physical and mental health, missed education and reduced productivity. Government then pays again through greater pressure on healthcare, housing, welfare and local services. A prevention-first policy addresses these causes before they become crises. Improving a home so that it requires less energy creates a permanent reduction in household exposure to high prices. Unlike a one-off rebate, the benefit continues each winter. It also reduces carbon emissions, improves comfort and protects health. Green Prosperity therefore starts with a simple principle: The first homes upgraded should be those occupied by people who have the least ability to pay and the most to gain. 3. Policy Options Option One: Continue Primarily with Bill Subsidies Government can provide rebates, discounts and emergency payments when prices rise. This offers immediate relief and remains necessary during periods of acute hardship. However, it is expensive, reactive and temporary. It pays part of an inefficient bill without reducing the underlying energy requirement of the property. In the current structure these interventions benefit the shareholders of private energy companies, where as it would benefit the nation if under pubic ownership Bill support should remain a safety net, but it cannot be the principal long-term strategy. Option Two: Universal Consumer Grants Government can offer grants towards insulation, solar panels, heat pumps and other improvements to all households. This can increase public participation, but universal grant schemes often benefit people who already have the savings, knowledge and confidence to complete installations. Lower-income households, tenants and people in complex properties may be left behind. Universal incentives have a role, but they need stronger targeting and delivery support. Option Three: Regulation Led Mainly by Mandates Government can require landlords, developers and homeowners to meet progressively higher energy standards. Regulation is necessary, particularly in the private rented sector and new construction. However, mandates introduced without finance, skilled installers or consumer protections can increase rents, provoke resistance or leave households facing unaffordable costs. Regulation should establish the destination, but investment and practical delivery must make compliance possible. Option Four: A National Area-Based Upgrade Programme Government, combined authorities and councils can coordinate improvements street by street and neighbourhood by neighbourhood, beginning in areas with high fuel poverty and inefficient housing. This approach reduces costs through scale, allows different technologies to be matched to local housing, gives households practical support and creates a predictable pipeline for training and employment. It is the strongest foundation for Green Prosperity. 4. The Green Prosperity Proposal We propose a ten-year Green Prosperity Programme built around five connected measures. 4.1 Warm Homes First Britain should establish a national mission to bring fuel-poor and low-income households into warm, efficient homes as the first priority of the Net Zero transition. Local authorities and combined authorities would identify neighbourhoods with high energy costs, poor housing efficiency and concentrations of vulnerable households. Accredited delivery partnerships would then undertake property assessments and install the most appropriate package of improvements. Measures could include: loft, cavity-wall and solid-wall insulation; draught-proofing and improved ventilation; double or secondary glazing where cost-effective; smart heating controls; heat pumps or clean heat networks where technically suitable; rooftop solar and battery storage; repairs needed before energy improvements can be installed. The Government’s current Warm Homes Plan already recognises the need to cut bills and transform ageing housing stock. Green Prosperity would strengthen that direction by making poverty prevention and area-based delivery its organising principles. (GOV.UK) No low-income household should be expected to take on unaffordable debt to participate. 4.2 Community Energy Dividend Communities should be enabled to own or share in local renewable-energy generation and storage. Solar installed on schools, council buildings, social housing, warehouses and community facilities could supply local energy schemes or generate revenues for local benefit. Community batteries could allow locally generated electricity to be stored and used when it is most valuable. A defined share of the financial return should support: discounted energy for low-income households; local home-upgrade funds; community facilities; advice and debt prevention; further clean-energy investment. The transition should not merely place infrastructure in communities. It should create assets owned by or benefiting those communities. 4.3 Green Jobs Guarantee Green Prosperity should be linked directly to a national industrial and skills strategy. Britain will need large numbers of trained workers to install insulation, heat pumps, solar panels, electrical systems, district heating and grid infrastructure. It should use that demand to create secure employment in communities affected by industrial decline. The programme would include: paid apprenticeships; regional retrofit academies; guaranteed training routes for unemployed and underemployed adults; support for small local installers; public procurement favouring good employment standards; investment in British production of clean-energy equipment. This would connect Green Prosperity with TAP’s Made in Britain agenda. Public investment would not only improve homes; it would help rebuild productive capacity and create skilled jobs. 4.4 Fair Energy Reform Energy costs should be rebalanced so that essential household consumption is affordable and the transition does not penalise those with the lowest incomes. The Government should examine: a social or protected tariff for households on low incomes or with unavoidable high energy needs; reductions in excessive standing-charge burdens automatic enrolment using existing benefit and income data moving appropriate environmental and social policy costs away from electricity bills and into more progressive funding safeguards for prepayment customers clearer rights for renters to request reasonable energy improvements. Support should be easy to receive and should not depend on vulnerable households repeatedly proving hardship to different agencies. 4.5 The Climate Poverty Test Every significant energy, transport, housing and Net Zero policy should be accompanied by a published assessment answering: Will it raise or lower bills for low- and middle-income households? Will it reduce fuel poverty? Who pays upfront, and who receives the long-term benefit? Will renters benefit as well as homeowners? Will it create secure, well-paid employment? Will benefits reach all regions? Could the policy unintentionally increase housing or transport costs? What protections are needed for those unable to adapt without support? A policy that advances emissions targets while worsening poverty should be redesigned—not abandoned but made fairer. This would make social justice a core measure of climate-policy quality rather than an afterthought. 5. How Green Prosperity Prevents Poverty Permanently Lower Bills Insulation, efficient heating and local clean power reduce the amount of energy households need to purchase. That provides lasting protection against price shocks. Improved Health Warmer, drier homes can reduce the health risks associated with cold, damp and mould. Prevention can reduce pressure on the NHS and social care while improving quality of life. Better Employment A predictable national programme would support thousands of jobs in construction, engineering, manufacturing and maintenance. Those jobs should be distributed across the country rather than concentrated in a few areas. Greater Energy Security Domestic renewable generation, storage and efficiency reduce Britain’s exposure to volatile global fossil-fuel prices. That supports more stable household costs and a more resilient economy. Reduced Inequality Without deliberate intervention, wealthier homeowners are most able to buy solar panels, batteries and efficient heating, while poorer households continue paying higher bills in inefficient homes. Green Prosperity reverses that order by directing early investment towards those with the greatest need. Stronger Local Economies Area-based programmes would support local businesses, training providers and supply chains. Community-energy revenues could circulate within local economies instead of leaving them entirely through external energy payments. 6. Funding and Delivery Green Prosperity would require substantial investment, but it should be assessed against the long-term costs of high bills, poor health, emergency subsidies, unemployment, imported energy and climate damage. Funding options could include: long-term government infrastructure funding green government bonds pension-fund and institutional investment energy-company obligations revenues from carbon pricing public development-bank finance local-authority borrowing for investable schemes land-value capture around major green infrastructure responsible private co-investment. Public support should be structured so that the financial return from installations does not flow entirely to contractors or investors while households carry the risk. National government would set standards and provide long-term finance. Regional and local bodies would coordinate delivery, identify priority areas and work with trusted community organisations. A national quality guarantee would protect households against poor workmanship, unsuitable technologies and aggressive selling. 7. Measuring Success The programme should not be judged only by the number of installations or tonnes of carbon saved. Success measures should include: reduction in household energy bills number of households lifted out of fuel poverty improvement in home energy performance reduction in cold- and damp-related illness number and quality of jobs created proportion of spending retained in regional economies household satisfaction emissions reductions reduction in energy imports distribution of benefits by income, tenure and region. A climate programme that lowers emissions but leaves vulnerable households behind is incomplete. Green Prosperity succeeds only when environmental and social progress happen together. 8. Recommended First Steps Within the first year, Government should: Establish the Climate Poverty Test for major national policies. Select ten urban, rural and coastal areas for Green Prosperity pilots. Create a unified household eligibility system so support is automatically targeted. Begin a national recruitment and training programme. Establish clear consumer and installation standards. Develop community-energy ownership and benefit-sharing rules. Publish a ten-year investment and delivery schedule. Create an independent Green Prosperity Commission to monitor outcomes and advise on fairness. The pilots should test different housing types, energy systems and local delivery models before rapid national expansion. Conclusion Britain’s transition to Net Zero should not be presented as a sacrifice imposed on households. It should be designed as one of the greatest opportunities in generations to improve homes, reduce bills, create skilled jobs and strengthen economic security. The country already spends heavily managing the consequences of fuel poverty: emergency assistance, poor health, debt, homelessness risk and lost productivity. Green Prosperity would redirect more of that effort towards prevention. Its promise is straightforward: warmer homes, lower bills, cleaner energy, better jobs and less poverty. That is not climate policy added to an anti-poverty agenda. It is a single, joined-up strategy in which each objective strengthens the other. Britain should not merely reach Net Zero. It should become fairer and more prosperous on the way.