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

Set aside time to worry

Diane Hall
Sep 18, 2024
4 min read

According to Paul Young, co-owner of Spiffy, The Happiness Shop, we should build time into our busy schedules to worry.

Woman stressing about all the incoming tasks

This may sound a strange thing to do; however, unnecessary worrying affects many people, and it can have a detrimental effect on their lives.

Human beings, in their caveman days, worried only about where their next meal was coming from, and ensuring they were not on the menu of hungry sabre-toothed tigers on the prowl. The worry as to whether their basic needs would be met was still inherent in Homo Sapiens in 10,000BC, which isn’t that long ago when you consider that they first appeared approximately 288,000 years prior.

In 2022AD, food is plentiful. We also have heat, shelter, clean(ish) air, access to clean water, clothing and the safety to go to sleep at night, etc. Most human beings’ needs on our planet today are easily met.

We don’t often find ourselves in life-threatening situations in the modern world; however, our brains have not adapted to this shift. They may not need to be concerned about sabre-toothed tigers, but that doesn’t mean they switch off. Instead, they create worries and problems for their hosts to solve.

There’s a well-known piece of advice relating to stress: will what you’re fretting over matter in five years’ time? If it’s not significant enough to impact your life in the not-too-distant-future, it’s not worth worrying about in the here and now, experts claim.

I get the premise behind that well-meaning advice, but often, I don’t feel in control of my worry. I suffer from acute anxiety in a number of real-life situations; however, once I’m out of, or away from, these scenarios, my anxiety disappears. Aimless worrying, in comparison, tends to stick around.

Though I don’t sit and worry for hours on end, as a woman of a certain age, I’m not immune to the menopausal hormone drop that occurs between 2am and 4am. Should I wake during this time window, I may as well not bother trying to get back to sleep—and this is when my worrying mind is most active.

In the early hours, I worry about job-related work I’ve to complete the next day, even though I know it will all be in hand when I get going. I worry about the life admin I’ve to sort. I worry about little details that are important and which I’d forgotten, and I worry whether I’ll still remember them when I wake up. I worry about my kids, even though they’re both adults with their own lives. Like everyone, I worry about money and whether I’m spending too much. I worry about things I’ve said, the things I’ve done. I ultimately worry that my worries are preventing me from getting much-needed sleep.

It's exhausting.

Young suggests setting time aside to address your worries rather than letting them pop up whenever they please. When you are able to concentrate on them, he recommends writing down your concerns on a piece of paper, so that you can scrutinise them properly. He believes this will give you some perspective, and seeing them written down may also make it easier to apply logic, which will help you determine the most appropriate solution.

A year long calendar view on a mobile phone

It’s important to remember that there’s only so much of your daily life that’s within your control. You’re not responsible for the emotions/actions of other people or outside influences such as the economy and the weather. Your first task, therefore, it to eliminate any worry about such things—it’s simply a waste of your energy if you can’t do anything about the outcome. What will happen will happen, regardless of any mental anguish you extol.

Young suggests that freelancing individuals can particularly benefit from this approach. As people who tend not to have a regular income, finances may be a particular worry amid the current cost-of-living crisis.

If worries are left to fester, they can affect an individual’s focus, which will have its own detrimental impact on their productivity, which surely makes Young’s suggestions worth a try.

Paula Gardner of the The Good Therapy Practice agrees that freelancers can be more susceptible to worry, which could be, she suggests, a result of remote working. When working from a shared office space or your employer’s business premises, it’s satisfying to physically shut the door on your working day. This sense of closure helps individuals exercise their boundaries, which may be a task more difficult for remote workers, whose home lives and working environments exist in the same space.

Because we don’t have to hunt for our food anymore or switch into survival mode umpteen times a day, we need to give our mind enough to do so that it doesn’t turn rogue and create mountains out of molehills. Read, take up a hobby, practice mindfulness, go for a walk, or just zone out in front of the TV if this is distracting enough for you. Get into a good routine before bedtime to ensure a decent night’s sleep—such as no phones or tablets in the bedroom, a relaxing bath, a milky drink…there are lots of suggestions online in this regard, just find what works for you.

Worrying for worry’s sake is unhealthy and a waste of your time. Put pen to paper and proactively tackle your concerns head on.