Macroeconomics: UK economy, IB Economics

Nils Pratley highlights the fact that the digital services tax isn't likely to scare the tech giants. The digital giants, Facebook, Google et al, aren't likely to be worried by the tax. 

And I wholeheartedly agree with Nils Pratley about the tech giants attitude that their actions are 'legal' and simply exploit existing tax loopholes; I'd ask them to differentiate between the 'legal' and 'ethical'.

Larry Elliott hits the nail on the head with his assessment of the Budget, as far as I'm concerned. He looks for possible explanations of the apparent 'generosity' of the Budget and concludes that this is a Budget reflecting weakness rather than strength. Had it been the latter, the government would have been prepared to 'tough it out' and maintain its pledges with regard to the budget deficit and public spending more generally. 

However, I will add my piece - I'm amazed that the government can get away with the narrative that the size of the government debt is a function of Labour profligacy. It's not - it's because the Labour government bailed out the banks, ironically, the natural supporters of...the Conservative party. 

The Telegraph with a very swift look at the winners and losers from the 2018 Budget. 

Some Guardian columnists respond to the Budget - it's fairly predictable stuff, but gives a flavour of how the Left, in its various hues perceives the Budget.

And there's more - the Budget also marked the announcement of plans for a digital services tax designed to affect the tech giants, and provide a more level playing field for the High Street.

Szu Ping Chan on the impact of the Budget on the state of the public finances: borrowing figures are improving but don't mention Brexit.

A summary of the Budget. And that is all. 

Kamal Ahmed with his ;five things to watch' piece for today's Budget, preparing the ground for the Chancellor's latest pronouncement later today. 

Another clever Larry Elliott article that highlights the challenges facing the Chancellor when he delivers his Budget tomorrow. Depicted as the 'End of Austerity', it remains to be seen how Philip Hammond will balance this with existing fiscal commitments and against the background of Brexit. 

Wot larks!

Disappointingly, some of the fiscal changes going to occur after the Budget have been pre-announced, and as a result, we've already got a taste of what's likely to come.

These include likely changes in the tax system, both of the personal allowance and the level at which the higher rate of taxation will be levied. 

Expect a fair bit of this over the weekend: the drip, drip of Budget snippets designed to excite, especially when they're something that it's difficult to disagree with. In this instance, the Chancellor throws beleaguered small shops a bone and, in doing so, offers the High Street a lifeline. 

Phillip Inman with more pre-Budget commentary arguing that we shouldn't expect the end of austerity just yet. His take is that the looming fear of Brexit is likely to see a little more austerity to give the Chancellor some ammunition should Brexit go wrong.

A brief primer for on the Budget. That is all.

Another quick snapshot of the Budget 2018: winners and losers, as calculated on behalf of the Guardian. The rich seem to be the biggest winners. 

The Office for Budgetary Responsibility highlights one of the features of yesterday's Budget that I thought got relatively little coverage: the Chancellor is no longer on track to balance the budget. So much for manifesto pledges, then. 

Robert Chote, Chairman of the OBR, is particularly scathing, noting that this was one of the Chancellor's two rules of fiscal policy and part of the government's legislative programme. 

Despite the Bruce Hornsbyesque notion that the Budget represented the "End of Austerity", the first analysis of the Budget by the left leaning Resolution Foundation confirmed my suspicions that the Budget did rather more for the rich rather than low income families. 

According to its analysis, rich households will be around £410 per year better off compared to the £30 poorer households will receive. And an interesting footnote, my early morning perusals of Twitter suggest that some are seeing it as possible insurance against the possibility of an early Brexit-induced election.

The Guardian highlights the fact that the tax giveaways in this year's Budget seem to be targeting the middle classes, with people earning over £50,000 per year receiving tax cuts worth around £860, in the form of a higher personal allowance and a rise in the tax threshold for the higher rate of tax. 

More on the end of austerity - or the 2018 Budget, if you prefer.

Kamal Ahmed's gut reaction to the Budget: hey, big spender!

Another Budget snapshot - more for mental health services - although it's Brexit dependent; however, you might also think about the negative externalities associated with mental health problems in the first place.

If you've any more appetite for budgetary articles - here's the last one of the day! I promise - this Guardian piece looks at 10 ways that the Chancellor could seek to raise revenue to help fund extra NHS spending. Worth a read - and you might think about the effects of these changes on the UK economy. 

Another pre-budgetary leak - an extra £420m to tackle potholes. Which might just about be enough to tackle the shoddy state of the roads in Birmingham, if not really anywhere else. 

Brexit and the Budget. Light reading for a Sunday; however, if there's a 'No Deal' Brexit, then we'll need another Budget. No surprises there. 

Missed this on Wednesday - Punch and Judy - or Andrew Sentence and David Blanchflower, if you prefer, look at the prospects for next week's Budget. If you follow their 'debates', you'll probably know what they suggest - and who is the most pessimistic.

Polly Toynbee delights in the dilemma facing the Chancellor at next week's Budget and wonders whether he will be able to meet the Prime Minister's pledge to "end austerity".

Guardian readers will, no doubt, be delighted by the battle cry of "soak the rich" but to be fair she has a point. Since 2008, the wealthiest in society have done remarkably well, not least because QE helped prop up asset prices.