Rachel Reeves will be grilled by MPs on Wednesday over a series of tax hikes and increased spending unveiled in the autumn Budget.
A change to the UK’s debt rule that was announced to unlock billions in borrowing is also likely to come under scrutiny as the Chancellor appears before Parliament’s Treasury Select Committee.
Ms Reeves used October’s financial statement to confirm an increase to employer national insurance contributions, changes to inheritance tax rules for farmers and a rise in the minimum wage.
Taxes were raised to a historic high, with £40 billion extra a year in revenue used to pour into schools, the NHS, transport and housing.
The Budget was constrained by two self-imposed “fiscal rules” – for day-to-day spending to be funded through taxation, and for debt, measured by the new yardstick of “public sector net financial liabilities”, to be falling as a share of GDP.
It comes amid anger from farmers over a decision to raise a tax of 20% on the value of inherited farming assets above £1 million.
While this still represents a relief of 50% compared with the standard rate, farming unions and opposition critics have argued the move will make food production harder and render Britain more reliant on imports.
The cross-party Treasury Select Committee, chaired by Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier, said it would “examine whether the Chancellor’s new fiscal rules are right for the health of the UK economy and changes to spending, taxation and debt”.
Permanent secretary of the Treasury James Bowler and senior Treasury officials Will Macfarlane and Conrad Smewing will also appear before MPs to answer questions on Wednesday.
On Tuesday, the committee was told by the fiscal watchdog that the previous government may have failed to follow legal obligations around providing information to the independent forecaster as it compiled its March predictions.
Chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) Richard Hughes said he thought there may have been a “misunderstanding” about the law after the watchdog was not made aware of £9.5 billion in spending pressures ahead of the fiscal statement in March.
The OBR said its judgment on spending would have been “materially different” had it had access to this information.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here