PolicyLens

Methodology note

Remove basic tax for NHS staff: calculation note

Assumptions behind the Remove basic tax for NHS staff scenario. Implementation detail is incomplete, so uncertainty is explicit.

View main policy page: Remove basic tax for NHS staff

Central fiscal result

+£8.0bn - Net fiscal impact in 2027-28

Low case: +£4.0bn. High case: +£14.0bn. Positive numbers are fiscal costs or borrowing pressure. Negative numbers are Exchequer savings or receipts.

Scenario and baseline

  • Eligible frontline NHS and social-care workers pay no basic-rate income tax.
  • The relief lasts three years.
  • Higher-rate tax above the basic band remains.
  • Eligibility is narrower than all health and care employment.

Affected population

  • Affected units are employee taxpayers in NHS and social care.
  • NHS England HCHS headcount is about 1.54m.
  • Adult social care has about 1.60m filled posts in England.
  • Low-paid workers below tax thresholds gain less.

Gross impact

  • Central case assumes about 2m eligible taxpayers after exclusions.
  • Average tax relief is around £4,000 per eligible worker.
  • Central cost is £8bn.
  • Retention savings are not fiscal-scored.

Fiscal build-up, central case

  • Income tax receipts lost: +£8.2bn
  • Higher hours and retention receipts: -£0.3bn
  • Administration and payroll changes: +£0.1bn
  • Administration and uncertainty: +£0.0bn

Central net impact: +£8.0bn in 2027-28.

Behaviour and pass-through

  • Low case assumes narrow eligibility and some retention benefit.
  • Central case assumes broad frontline coverage and limited offset.
  • High case includes agency staff, devolved spillovers and classification pressure.
  • Tax relief does not train new workers quickly.

Phasing

  • 2026-27: +£2.0bn. Preparation or partial implementation.
  • 2027-28: +£8.0bn. Main scenario year.
  • 2028-29: +£8.5bn. Behaviour and pass-through develop.
  • 2029-30: +£8.5bn. Steady-state uncertainty persists.

Main source groups

  • Propper, Burgess and Gossage, "Competition and Quality: Evidence from the NHS" (Economic Journal, 2008): NHS incentives can affect quality, so workforce policy should consider service performance as well as headcount; relevant to retention claims, though not a direct tax-relief study.
  • NHS Digital, "NHS Workforce Statistics, August 2025" (2025): NHS England HCHS staff numbered about 1.54 million headcount in August 2025; anchors tax-relief exposure.
  • Skills for Care, "State of the adult social care workforce 2025" (2025): Adult social care in England had about 1.60 million filled posts in 2024-25; anchors care-worker exposure.
  • Reform UK, "Our Contract with You" (2024): Used to define the pledge wording, policy scope and implementation scenario being modelled.
  • HM Revenue and Customs, "Direct effects of illustrative tax changes" (2026): Used to support the baseline, affected-population sizing or behavioural assumptions in the illustrative scenario.
  • Saez, Slemrod and Giertz, "The Elasticity of Taxable Income" (Journal of Economic Literature, 2012): Tax changes can affect reported earnings, hours and avoidance through multiple margins; supports caution on labour-supply claims from targeted tax relief.
  • Reform UK, "Our Policies" (2026): Used to define the pledge wording, policy scope and implementation scenario being modelled.