Reeves’ pubs U-turn: how business rates sparked a revolt, and why ministers are now under fire

15 January 2026

Paul Francis

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

Rachel Reeves is preparing a U-turn on business rates for pubs after an unusually public backlash from landlords, trade bodies, and even some Labour MPs. In recent days, pubs across the country have reportedly refused service to, or outright barred, Labour MPs in protest, turning a technical tax change into a political flashpoint about competence, consultation, and whether the government understood its own numbers.

Two pints of frothy beer on a wooden ledge, reflecting on a window. Warm, dim lighting creates a cozy atmosphere.

The row centres on business rates, the property-based tax paid on most non-domestic premises. For pubs, it is often one of the highest fixed costs after staffing and energy. And while the government has argued its reforms were meant to make the system fairer for high street businesses, many publicans say the real world impact is the opposite: higher bills arriving at the same time as wage costs and other overheads are already rising.

What changed and why pubs reacted so fiercely

The immediate trigger was the November Budget package, which set out changes tied to the 2026 business rates revaluation and the planned move away from pandemic era relief. As the details landed, hospitality groups warned that many pubs would be hit by sharp rises because their rateable values, the Valuation Office Agency’s estimate of a property’s annual rental value, had increased significantly at revaluation.

A Reuters report published on 8 January 2026 described the government preparing measures to “soften the impact” of the planned hike after industry warnings that closures would follow. It also noted trade body concerns about elevated rateable values and warned that thousands of smaller pubs could face a bill for the first time.

The anger quickly became visible. ITV News reported on pub owners in Dorset who began banning Labour MPs after the Budget, with the campaign spreading as other pubs joined in. LabourList also reported that more than 1,000 pubs had banned Labour MPs from their premises in protest. Sky News similarly reported that pubs had been banning Labour MPs over the rises due to begin in April.

How business rates are actually calculated, with pub-friendly examples

Business rates can sound opaque, but the calculation is straightforward in principle:

Business rates bill = Rateable value x Multiplier, minus any reliefs

Where it became combustible for pubs is that multiple moving parts changed at once: revaluation shifted rateable values, multipliers were adjusted for different sectors, and pandemic era relief was being reduced or removed.

The government’s own Budget factsheet includes worked examples that show why bills can jump even when headline multipliers look lower.

Example 1: a pub whose rateable value rises modestly: In 2025/26, a pub with a £30,000 rateable value used a multiplier of 49.9p and then deducted 40% retail, hospitality and leisure relief. The factsheet sets out the steps: £30,000 x 0.499 = £14,970, then 40% relief reduces that to a final bill of £8,982. After revaluation, the rateable value rises to £39,000. The pub qualifies for a lower small business multiplier of 38.2p, so before reliefs: £39,000 x 0.382 = £14,898. Transitional support caps the increase, resulting in a final bill of £10,329.

Even here, the bill rises. The cap stops it from rising as sharply as it otherwise would, but it still climbs.

Example 2: a pub whose rateable value more than doubles: In the most politically explosive scenario, the factsheet describes a pub whose rateable value rises from £50,000 to £110,000 at revaluation. In 2025/26, the bill is calculated as £50,000 x 0.499 = £24,950, then reduced by 40% relief to £14,970. In 2026/27, before any relief, the bill would be £110,000 x 0.43 = £47,300. Transitional support then caps the increase, producing a final bill of £19,461.

That is still a meaningful jump in a single year, even with protections. For pubs operating on thin margins, that scale of increase can mean the difference between staying open and closing.

This is why so many publicans argue that the political messaging did not match the lived reality. They were told reforms would support the high street, then saw calculations that delivered higher costs.

What Reeves is now doing to correct it

The government has not published the full final package yet, but multiple reports describe a targeted climbdown.

Reuters reported that a support package would be outlined in the coming days and that it would include measures addressing business rates, alongside licensing and deregulation. LabourList reported that Treasury officials were expected to reduce the percentage of a pub’s rateable value used to calculate business rates and introduce a transitional relief fund. The Independent reported ministers briefing that Reeves was expected to extend some form of relief rather than scrap support entirely from April, after pressure from Labour MPs and the sector.

In practical terms, “softening” the rise can be done in a few ways:

Increasing or extending pub-specific relief so bills do not jump as sharply in April 2026
Adjusting the multiplier applied to pubs within the retail, hospitality and leisure category
Strengthening transitional relief so the cap on year to year increases is tighter
Supplementary measures like licensing changes, to reduce other cost pressures

The direction of travel is clear: the Treasury is trying to stop the revaluation shock from landing all at once on pubs.

The critics’ argument: ministers did not do their homework

The most damaging strand of this story is not the U turn itself, but the allegation that ministers did not understand the impact at the point of announcement.

Sky News has reported internal disquiet about the business rates increase, reflecting wider unease about the political cost of the policy. ITV has also reported pub owners arguing that the “devil is in the detail,” a polite way of saying the announcement did not match the numbers that followed.

Most seriously, reporting summarised from The Times states that Business Secretary Peter Kyle acknowledged ministers did not have key details about the revaluation’s effects on hospitality at the time of the November Budget, and that the property specific revaluations created an unexpected burden for some pubs.

That admission fuels the criticism that this was not simply a policy misfire, but a failure of preparation. The core accusation from critics is straightforward: if the government is reshaping a tax system built on property values, then the people in charge should have had a clear grasp of what the valuation changes would do to real businesses. If they did not, they were not doing the job properly.

Even if ministers argue the valuation process is independent, the political reality is that pubs heard one message, then saw another outcome. The result has been a crisis of trust that a late rescue package may soften, but not erase.

What this episode tells us about tax policy and trust

Pubs are not just businesses. They are community anchors and cultural institutions, which is why this backlash travelled so quickly from accountancy jargon to front-page politics.

Reeves’ U turn may yet prevent the worst outcomes for some pubs. But the episode has exposed a deeper vulnerability: when the government announces complex reforms without convincing evidence, it understands the knock on effects, and the backlash is not only economic. It becomes personal, symbolic, and politically contagious.

If the Treasury wants to draw a line under this, it will need to do more than patch the numbers. It will need to convince the public and the businesses affected that decisions are being made with full visibility of the consequences, not discovered after the revolt begins.

Current Most Read

When AI Crosses the Line: Why the Grok Controversy Has Triggered a Regulatory Reckoning

A World on Edge: Why Global Tensions Are Rising and What History Can Tell Us

A music illiterate reviews Eurovision Part 1

Connor Banks
May 15, 2024
7 min read

This past weekend saw millions tune in around the world to watch the 2024 Eurovision final hosted in Malmo Sweden. Known for its diverse musical genres, spectacular performances, and the unique opportunity to showcase national cultures, Eurovision captivates millions of viewers worldwide. This year's entries are no exception, featuring everything from pop and rock to folk and opera, each aiming to capture the hearts of both the professional juries and the voting public. But no one has heard the opinion of someone that knows nothing about music, so clearly that is what’s needed! Join us for A Music Idiots Review of Eurovision!

37 Countries competed in this year's Eurovision across the Semi Finals and the Final itself, which means we have 37 songs to review!

Iceland “Scared of Heights” By Hera Bjork

Starting off with Iceland, they have had a notable presence in the Eurovision Song Contest since their debut in 1986. Though it has yet to win the competition, failing to make it out of the semi-finals this year, was this perhaps a hidden gem among the songs this year?

Scared of Heights must be quite fortunate for Hera as the song did not reach the dizzying heights of the semi final scoreboard only receiving 3 points, which arguably is 3 too many. This song certainly is one of the songs of all time, in fact it's so striking in its blandness and lack of uniqueness that we come to expect from Eurovision songs that it unfortunately reminds me of “Embers”. Sorry Iceland, but I have to give you nil pois for this one.

Azerbaijan "Özünlə apar" by FAHREE feat. Ilkin Dovlatov

Since debuting in 2008, Azerbaijan has quickly established itself as a powerhouse in the Eurovision Song Contest, highlighted by its win in 2011 with "Running Scared" by Ell & Nikki. With a reputation for high-quality performances and frequent top 10 finishes, Azerbaijan continues to be a formidable and dynamic competitor in Eurovision. This year they were represented by FAHREE and Ilkin Dovlatov with their song "Özünlə apar". Despite historically doing well at Eurovision this only only netted them 11 points in the semi finals. But was this a justified 14th place finish at the semis? Honestly, I kind of like the song, it has a great sound to it and the singing is only adds to it but yet its missing something. Whilst the song has good vocals and seemed to be a decent representation of Mugham music, it lacked a lot of character we tend to expect from Azerbaijan and their performances. Speaking of, the performance they did required you to have seen the music video to “understand” it, which does not usually make for an entertaining viewing experience when you need to have extracurricular viewing requirements. In the end, it’s a decent song just not the best representation we’ve had out of the country, finishing 14th in the semi final was probably fair.

Moldova “In The Middle” Natalia Barbu

Since their debut in 2005, Moldova has made a significant impact on the Eurovision Song Contest with a mix of quirky and memorable performances. Highlighted by a 3rd place finish in 2017 with SunStroke Project's "Hey Mamma," Moldova continues to be a favourite for its unique and entertaining contributions to the contest. But what was this year's entry like?

I think this might be the first song where my opinion differs from the results and I guess the rest of Europe. Natalia Barbu has beautiful vocals on this song, with her voice being the main focal point of the song carrying the bridge into the chorus which switches into her native language from English and even goes into a violin solo. This song is what many of us expect to hear when we think of Eurovision. The fact this song only barely finished above the previous 2 songs is criminal. It definitely deserved to finish higher, maybe even challenging for a final spot.

Poland “The Tower” by Luna

Debuting in 1994, Poland has participated in the Eurovision Song Contest with a wide range of musical styles and culturally infused performances. Despite not securing a win, Poland has achieved notable successes, particularly with Edyta Górniak's 2nd place in their debut year and other memorable entries like Donatan & Cleo's "My Słowianie" and Michał Szpak's "Color of Your Life." But enough about the past, what was this year’s song and performance like? Well considering it finished above Moldova it has to be good right?!?! WRONG. I like synth-pop, a few of my favourite songs of all time are synth songs. But this is one of the dullest synth pop songs I’ve heard. Not to mention the vocal performance itself isn't anything special, sure Luna can sing but it's not blowing anyone away. The stage performance was interesting with her performing on a chess board with 2 rook pieces, it was an entertaining performance and definitely deserves praise from that perspective. However I do think it finished around where it should have. 12th in the semi final is a good spot for it. It’s getting a 4.

Australia “One Milkali (One Blood)” by Electric Fields

A much more recent addition to Eurovision, Australia first appeared in 2015 and since making significant impact with strong entries and memorable performances. Highlighted by Dami Im's 2nd place finish in 2016 with "Sound of Silence," Australia has consistently delivered high-quality performances that blend powerful vocals, creative staging, and contemporary pop appeal. Australia's participation adds a unique and diverse dimension to the contest, further broadening Eurovision's global reach. However the reach wasn’t global enough this year as they failed to make it out of the semi final stage. Was this deserved? Well the song they performed wasn’t the worst song from Eurovision, and if there's anything Australia has proven its that they “get” eurovision. I personally liked the song and how they incorporated Aboriginal lyrics and instruments into the song. It had a fun and catchy house beat with a strong vocal performance to go along with it. Whilst failing to make it through to the semi’s, I don’t think Australia should be ashamed of their performance. A solid song, I’m giving it a 6.5/10 on my totally not arbitrary made up scoring system that's totally objective and not subjective.

Malta “Loop” by Sarah Bonnici

Malta has established itself as a formidable contender in the Eurovision Song Contest. The country has achieved notable success, particularly with Ira Losco's "7th Wonder" in 2002 and Chiara's "Angel" in 2005, both of which secured 2nd place finishes. Malta is celebrated for its strong vocal performances and polished pop songs. Despite not having secured a win yet, Malta continues to be a competitive and respected participant, consistently delivering engaging and high-quality entries that captivate audiences and showcase contemporary music blended with captivating stage presentations. Despite good history in the competition, I don't think this song was particularly anything special, whilst it had a fun live dance performance and Sarah has a great voice, I personally didn’t think it was anything special overall nor thought that it was Eurovision enough to deserve to go beyond the semi finals, which turns out others agreed with as it finished bottom of its semi final grouping. Not a bad song, just not very Eurovision or inspired. 4/10

Albania “Titan” Besa

Albania has consistently participated in the Eurovision Song Contest, earning respect for its strong vocal performances and culturally rich entries. Highlighted by Rona Nishliu's 5th place finish in 2012 with "Suus," Albania has made a significant impact with its blend of powerful ballads, rock influences, and cultural authenticity. This year they were represented by Besa with the ballad “Titan” and failed to make it past the Semi Final. But was this what the song deserved? Yeah probably, whilst I personally am a sucker for ballads, this one wasn’t the more inspiring. Vocal ballads rely heavily on vocal performance and whilst Besa has beautiful voice, the performance didn’t live up to the height required for a ballad to do well at Eurovision. 5/10

Belgium “Before The Party Is Over” Mustii

Belgium has made a significant impact on the Eurovision Song Contest with a variety of musical styles and memorable performances. This year they were represented by Mustii with the song “Before The Party Is Over”. The on stage performance featured Mustii performing whilst surrounded by a circle of microphones, which helped provide a memorable and unique visual. The song itself was described by Mustii as “pop with a dark edge” and honestly I sort of can see that, its very much similar to other pop ballads but Mustii’s voice is the main focus of the song and helps elevate it to the next level. The song build and builds as it slowly reaches a crescendo as it reaches its truly epic scale. This song is a hidden gem among the songs that failed to get past the semi final. It’s actually a crime that it did not make it through to the final. 7/10

Denmark “Sand” Saba

Denmark has established itself as a formidable and respected presence in the Eurovision Song Contest, known for its high-quality entries and diverse musical styles. The country has achieved three notable victories: in 1963 with Grethe & Jørgen Ingmann's melodic "Dansevise," in 2000 with the Olsen Brothers' catchy "Fly on the Wings of Love," and in 2013 with Emmelie de Forest's powerful "Only Teardrops." But does “Sand” by Saba live up to this legacy? Well sort of? The song itself is a catchy vocal pop ballad that gets to show off Saba’s talent and skill however the song itself didn’t make it out of the semi finals and I honestly can understand why. However I don’t think this song should have finished above Belgium and I understand why this one couldn’t break it out of the Semi Finals. 5.5/10

Czechia “Pedestal” Aiko

Czechia, also known as the Czech Republic, has been making its mark on the Eurovision Song Contest with a series of notable performances and increasing success since its debut in 2007. After initial challenges, including non-qualification in its first three attempts, Czechia's perseverance paid off with Mikolas Josef's energetic "Lie to Me" in 2018, which finished in 6th place, marking the country’s best result to date.

This year they submitted the pop-punk song “Pedestal” by Aiko. This song seems to be a lot like marmite for a lot of people with some thinking that it deserved to make it into the final and others thinking that it did well to almost qualify but just missed out. Personally I think it's a fine song, but I don't think the final was missing the song, I’ll give a 5/10.