
.
Richard Darlington is head of news at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR)
George Osborne is hoping to make one thing crystal clear: what your taxes are spent on.
You have to look really hard at the pie chart release by the Treasury to even notice the overseas aid budget, but the welfare bill hits you full in the face. Every taxpayer will welcome such transparency. But what the new personal tax statements won’t do is breakdown the big piece of the pie chart called ‘welfare’.
So in case you were wondering, here is what your personal tax statement could have shown you, if it did:

That’s right, two-fifths (42%) of welfare spending goes on pensioners: a whooping £77bn in total. And more than 15% - £31bn - goes on children, via child benefit and the child tax credit. That’s almost £6 out of every £10 of welfare spending accounted for and, so far, not a “scrounger” in sight.
Then we’ve got another 10% going on support for disabled people - and this should not be confused with incapacity benefit, now called employment and support allowance, or ESA. A further 5% goes to carers and boosting the incomes of the working poor.
Only a shade over a 10th of the benefits bill - and a far smaller share of total public spending - is actually spent on directly replacing the incomes of those not in work, through jobseeker’s allowance, income support and ESA (£21bn in total). The remaining large items of spending are council tax benefit (£5bn) and housing benefit (£20bn).
• Budget 2012: Tippex still wet on the coalition agreement 21 Mar 2011
• Budget 2012: Impact per decile – the poorer you are, the harder you’re hit 21 Mar 2011
• Budget 2012: It may do nothing for growth, but the fat cats will purr more loudly 21 Mar 2012
• “According to my tax breakdown, Daily Mail readers are the biggest scroungers” 20 Mar 2012
• The charts that shame the “we’re all in this together” coalition 16 Mar 2012
This is not an argument for exempting the benefits system from the important task of deficit reduction - still less fixing the benefits system as it is. We need a highly active, conditional welfare system that enables (and expects) people to take advantage of employment growth, when it returns.
But these reform issues must be addressed on the basis of facts and proper transparency would be a good start.

Pingback: Sarah Beattie-Smith
Pingback: BevR
Pingback: TeresaMary
Pingback: Sean
Pingback: Richard Darlington
Pingback: Budget 2012: Good or bad? For the few or the many? Vote in our survey | Left Foot Forward
Pingback: Jos Bell
Pingback: Legal Aware
Pingback: marie abbott
Pingback: b1gg4news
Pingback: Max Dunbar
Pingback: Ruth Hayes
Pingback: john peter ingamells
Pingback: Jenny Smith
Pingback: Jamie Potter
Pingback: Shahinaz Nabeeh
Pingback: craig dickens
Pingback: Where's the Benefit?
Pingback: Lisa Egan
Pingback: Foxy52
Pingback: BevR
Pingback: Obtuse™
Pingback: Catherine Brunton
Pingback: Steph
Pingback: Catherine Geldart
Pingback: Anne Corris
Pingback: Samuel Miller
Pingback: Deborah Ruston
Pingback: Wendy MacKenzie
Pingback: TheCreativeCrip
Pingback: sean
Pingback: Richard Darlington
Pingback: BevR
Pingback: NE CP Commission
Pingback: Will Grayling and IDS stand up to Osborne over £10bn DWP cuts? | Left Foot Forward
Pingback: Look Left – Donors, petrol, Galloway... The week to end all weeks | Left Foot Forward
Pingback: Richard Darlington
Pingback: Richard Darlington
Pingback: Council tax benefit reforms will hit working-age adults in poverty | Left Foot Forward