Tag: technology

  • The Labour Government’s BRIT Card Proposal:Tackle immigration or Government Oversight

    The Labour Government’s BRIT Card Proposal:Tackle immigration or Government Oversight

    Labour’s proposed ‘BRIT Card’ aims to establish a mandatory digital ID for UK workers to combat illegal employment and immigration. However, concerns about costs, privacy, and effectiveness undermine public trust. Alternatives, such as enhancing the national insurance system and targeted enforcement, may offer more efficient solutions without significant disruption or expense.-

    -Analysing the Merits, Risks, and Alternatives to Mandatory Digital ID Cards

    Introduction: Labour’s BRIT Card and Its Stated Aims

    Recently, Labour leader Keir Starmer announced plans for a mandatory ‘BRIT Card’ identity card, intended to curb illegal working and deter illegal immigration. This digital ID would become a prerequisite for lawful employment in the UK, forming the centrepiece of Labour’s efforts to demonstrate robust control over the labour market and immigration system.

    While the government suggests that the proposal seeks to address long-standing concerns over illegal employment, the public are not convinced.

    Furthermore, there is significant questions regarding cost, effectiveness, privacy, and the necessity of a new ID system and what is  the true purpose.

    Current Identification Landscape in the UK

    At present, individuals in the UK can prove their identity and right to work using a variety of documents: passports, driving licences, biometric residence permits, and national insurance numbers. While most UK adults possess at least one of these forms of ID, a small yet notable minority—often the most vulnerable—do not.

    The government’s rationale for a universal digital ID is that it would eliminate ambiguity and standardise right-to-work checks. However, this overlooks the utility of existing IDs for the vast majority and the administrative burden on those without any such documentation.

    Passports and driving licences already function as widely accepted photo IDs, but they come with their own barriers: the cost of obtaining or renewing them can be prohibitive for low-income individuals, and not everyone drives or travels abroad. National insurance numbers, meanwhile, are essential for employment but currently lack a photo or biometric component, which limits their utility as a standalone proof of identity.

    Financial and Administrative Costs

    Implementing a new, mandatory identity system is no trivial expense. Previous government estimates for similar schemes, such as the scrapped ID card project of the 2000s, ran into billions of pounds. Even with advances in digital technology, initial outlays for infrastructure, IT systems, and public outreach would be substantial. Ongoing maintenance, cybersecurity, and support for those struggling with digital access would further increase costs. It is likely that the taxpayer would bear the brunt of these expenses, raising questions about value for money in a period of fiscal restraint.

    There are also indirect costs to consider: employers would need to update recruitment processes, train staff, and potentially invest in new verification technology. For individuals, especially those unfamiliar with digital systems, navigating registration could prove daunting.

    Advertisements

    Implementation and Effectiveness: Will the BRIT Card Work?

    The effectiveness of the BRIT Card hinges on comprehensive registration and consistent enforcement. Everyone of working age—citizens and migrants alike—would need to register, provide biometric data, and keep their details up to date. Yet, experience with government digital projects suggests that achieving universal compliance is highly challenging. Those liable to work illegally may simply avoid the system or find ways to circumvent it, such as using forged documents or working in the informal economy.

    Moreover, determined employers who currently flout right-to-work checks may be equally adept at sidestepping a new ID regime. The deterrent effect, therefore, risks being limited unless accompanied by a step-change in enforcement resources and penalties.

    Privacy, Digital Exclusion, and Data Security Concerns

    Centralising sensitive personal data in a single digital ID system raises profound privacy risks. The more data collected—biometric, personal, employment—the greater the consequences if that data is breached. Past incidents, both in the UK and abroad, demonstrate that no system is immune to hacking or accidental leaks.

    Digital exclusion is another pressing issue. Significant numbers of people—especially older adults, those with disabilities, or individuals lacking internet access—could struggle to register or maintain their digital ID. Ensuring equitable access would require costly support services and alternative registration methods, potentially undermining the efficiency arguments for a digital-first approach.

    Finally, there is the risk of ‘scope creep’: once a digital ID exists, the temptation to use it for other purposes—such as accessing public services, policing, or even voting—may grow, raising further civil liberties concerns.

    Advertisements

    Comparison to Existing Laws and Penalties

    UK employers are already legally obliged to check employees’ right to work, with substantial fines and potential criminal sanctions for non-compliance. The Home Office provides guidance and maintains a list of acceptable documents. While enforcement is sometimes criticised as patchy, the legislative framework is well-established. The BRIT Card, therefore, represents a new administrative layer rather than a fundamental legal shift.

    Crucially, the existing system allows for a degree of flexibility that could be lost with a rigid, one-size-fits-all digital ID requirement. For those with complex or unusual immigration circumstances, or those whose documents are in the process of being renewed, this could create real hardship.

    An Alternative: Enhancing the National Insurance System and Targeted Enforcement

    Rather than create an entirely new identity infrastructure, a more proportionate solution could involve modernising the existing national insurance (NI) system. By incorporating a secure photo ID or biometric element into NI numbers, the government could strengthen right-to-work checks without duplicating documentation requirements. Such an enhancement would leverage a system already embedded in the employment process and familiar to employers and workers alike.

    This approach should be paired with targeted, intelligence-led enforcement focusing on high-risk sectors and repeat offenders, instead of blanket bureaucracy. Investment in digital verification tools for employers and regular audits would further bolster compliance, while avoiding the pitfalls of a universal digital ID.

    What would this cost. Well, I would set up a task force of 400 HMRC investigators to chase down illegal workers which I estimate would cost £30million.  Both the individual and the employer would be fined. If they only found 5 illegal worker each and the employer was fines £15000 (the current law allows up to £45k for the first offence), this would cover the cost. However, since it is suggested, there are over 500,000 illegal workers in the UK, there is a potential of £22 Billion to recover.

    I personally would start the fine at £10,000 for businesses and £2500 for individuals. The reason for this is the smaller business would go out of business with a £45k fine, but £10k should be enough of a deterrent. Remember, both the employer and the employee are doing something illegal.

    Those foreign nationals without any right to stay would be sent home.

     

    Personal Perspective: A Flawed Solution in Search of a Problem?

    Labour’s BRIT Card proposal appears to be a politically expedient response to anxiety over immigration and illegal working. However, the costs—financial, administrative, and personal—seem disproportionate to the likely benefits. The risks to privacy and the spectre of digital exclusion cannot be ignored, especially when existing systems can be strengthened at lower cost and with less disruption.

    Public trust in government data handling is already fragile, and the creation of a new, centralised identity database risks eroding it further. Rather than pursue a grand new scheme, the government would do better to focus on pragmatic reforms to the national insurance system and smarter, more targeted enforcement.

     

    Advertisements

    Leave a comment

  • UK Fuel Duty Revenue Decline: Impact of Electric Vehicles

    UK Fuel Duty Revenue Decline: Impact of Electric Vehicles

    Introduction

    Over the past five years, the UK Government has witnessed a significant reduction in fuel duty revenue together with a decline in car BIK (Benefit in kind) revenue.

    The loss over the last 5 years is circa 3 Bn per year for fuel duty alone.

    This decline can be attributed to the increasing adoption of electric vehicles (EVs), which do not attract fuel duty. So the revenue from fuel duty is only going to decrease as more and more people shift to Electric Cars.

    The Decline in Fuel Duty Revenue

    Fuel duty has historically been a significant source of revenue for the UK government. However, in recent years, this revenue has been on a steady decline. Fuel duties, which once contributed as much as 8% to the annual tax revenues, have now dropped to around 4% over the last four fiscal years .  it will decrease  further over the coming years.

    The Rise of Electric Vehicles

    The adoption of electric vehicles in the UK has been growing rapidly. In 2023, the number of electric cars registered in the UK reached 455,200, a 23% increase from the previous year . By the end of June 2025, there were over 1.55 million fully electric cars on UK roads .

    Whilst the government has started to address the shortfall, I do not think it is sufficient to fill the gap and is therefore adding more pressures on other taxes and  government expenditure.

    Cost Comparison: Public Charging vs. Home Charging

    There are 3 factors that affect the adoption of Electric Vehicles

    Firstly, no road funds licence. Whilst the government has introduced a modest fee, this is not in my mind sufficient to offset the loss in revenue.

    The second factor that is influencing the adoption of electric vehicles is the cost of charging. Charging an electric vehicle at home is generally more cost-effective than using public charging stations. The average cost of electricity in the UK is around 34p per kWh, (I pay 25p per Kwh) making home charging significantly cheaper. In contrast, public charging stations can cost around 50p per kWh for fast charging and up to 73p per kWh for ultra-rapid charging .

    These figure are interesting when you compare to the wholesale electricity currently cost of  8.69p per Kwh. (according to Energy Stats UK). Assuming 70p per Kwh, at the charging point, 20% VAT 12p less 9p wholesale cost, this gives 49p to the supplier. However, at home at a charge of 25p per Kwh (what I am currently paying for electricity) and VAT at 5%  (1.25p per Kwh)  the supplier gets  14.75p per Kwh.

    My conclusion is that, the supplier for a service station charges are getting  over triple that your domestic supplier is getting, which  does not make sense to me. I believe that the charges at the service station charges are charging a rate compatible with Petrol and Diesel costs, even though they are heavily taxed. The charger providers are making the equivalent to the fuel duty on the petrol and diesel that would otherwise go to the government. They are doing this because they can and people will pay as there is not enough competition due to lack of charging points.

    I accept that there is a capital expense in installing a charging station, but no more so than a petrol station, so why should they make significantly more money.

    Thirdly, the benefit in kind (BIK) for electric company cars is ridiculously low. Currently the BIK is now 3% which means someone with a  £40,000 company car in the 20% tax bracket would only pay £20 per month. That is one hell of a benefit and does not reflect the actual benefit. To lease an equivalent car would be over £300 per month. So it is no wonder 50% of company cars are now electric.

    So What would I do

    • Have all cars subject to a minimum road tax of £195 as current level.
    • I would have a sliding scale for cars based upon their power.  It is the way they tax ICE (Internal Combustion Engines) cars so this should be applied to Electric Vehicles. In essence a car that can accelerate from 0-60 in under 4 seconds will use more electricity than a car that achieved it in 8 seconds. You can even buy a small Volvo SUV that can accelerate from 0-60 in 3.6 seconds. This is ridiculous. The sliding scale I would implement would be £100 per second under 8 seconds. Given the average mainstream EV acceleration is under 6 seconds, this would generate £2.2 bn to £3Bn
    • I would also adjust the BIK (benefit in Kind) for company electric cars. I would charge a BIK that is the equivalent tax of £100 for 20% tax payers and £200 for higher rate taxpayers. This would add at least ½ Bn to 1Bn in tax revenue.
    • I would add 20% charge for the equivalent of fuel duty. Whilst in theory, this would increase the cost by 20%, I believe by increased competition as more charging station appear, this cost will be absorbed into the overall cost. As I explained earlier, the current suppliers are making too much. I believe this would generate 0.25 Bn
    • I would have the equivalent of Ofgem, to monitor these costs and if necessary, implement a price cap. It works for our domestic supply so why not for Car charging.
    • The above would apply to all cars, EV or ICE and would rectify the decline in revenues from Fuel Duty etc due to electric Vehicle. However, I would make electric vehicles subject to 10% VAT and Hybrid subject to 15% VAT producing a £4000 saving on a  New £40k EV. How would this be paid for?  I expect this to pay for itself as it will encourage additional purchases of New EV’s, in significant higher numbers than before. I would go further and reduce UK made EV cars to 5% VAT to encourage investment in the UK.  I have, whenever possible bought (8 out of the last 9 cars) British Made cars and anything that encourages home grown products has to be a good thing.
    •  

    Conclusion

    The reduction in fuel duty revenue, coupled with the rise of electric vehicles, presents a significant challenge for the UK government. While the transition to electric vehicles is essential for environmental sustainability, it also necessitates a re-evaluation of the tax system to ensure that government revenue remains stable.

    , , , , , ,

    Leave a comment