Author: Glenn

Employees with a second job, third job or more may be able to defer or delay paying Class 1 National Insurance on their additional employment. This deferment can be requested when Class 1 National Insurance contributions are being paid to more than one employer.

If you have 2 jobs, over the tax year you’ll need to earn:

• £967 or more per week from one job over the tax year.
• £242 or more per week in your second job

If you have more than 2 jobs, over the tax year you’ll need to earn:

• £1,209 or more per week from 2 of those jobs
• £242 or more per week in your other jobs

This deferral could result in NIC deductions at a reduced rate of 2% on your weekly earnings between £242 and £967 in one of your jobs, instead of the standard rate of 8%.

If you are allowed to defer, HMRC will inform you which employer is your main one for full Class 1 National Insurance contributions and which employers you can pay at the reduced 2% rate, sending those employers a certificate of deferment. HMRC does not share information about your other jobs with your employers.

HMRC will check if you have paid enough National Insurance at the end of the tax year and will write to you if you owe anything.

There is now less than 1 months to the self-assessment filing deadline for submissions of the 2024-25 tax returns. We urge our readers who have not yet completed and filed their 2024-25 tax return to file as soon as possible to avoid the stress of last-minute preparations as the 31 January 2026 deadline fast approaches.

You should also be aware that payment of any tax due should also be made by this date. This includes the remaining self-assessment balance for the 2024-25 tax year, and the first payment on account for the 2025-26 tax year.

Earlier this year, more than 11.5 million people submitted their 2023-24 self-assessment tax returns by the 31 January deadline. This included 732,498 taxpayers who left their filing until the final day and almost 31,442 that filed in the last hour (between 23:00 and 23:59) before the deadline!

There is a new digital PAYE service for the High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC). This allows Child Benefit claimants who previously used self-assessment solely to pay the charge to opt out and instead pay it through their tax code.

If you are filing online for the first time you should ensure that you register to use HMRC’s self-assessment online service as soon as possible. Once registered an activation code will be sent by mail. This process can take up to 10 working days. 

If you miss the filing deadline you will be charged a £100 fixed penalty (unless you have a reasonable excuse) which applies even if there is no tax to pay, or if the tax due is paid on time. There are further penalties for late tax returns still outstanding 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after the deadline. There are additional penalties for late payment of tax amounting to 5% of the tax unpaid at 30 days, 6 months and 12 months.

The Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) has raised its savings guarantee for bank deposits, increasing the deposit protection limit from £85,000 to £120,000 per person. This change came into effect on 1 December 2025 and marks a significant increase in how your bank deposits are protected in the UK.

This new deposit protection limit ensures that qualifying UK bank and building society depositors are covered if their bank fails. The FSCS compensation limit is reviewed periodically by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA). Following a consultation in March 2025, the PRA confirmed the increase in November 2025. Prior to this, the £85,000 limit had been in place since January 2017.

The FSCS protection applies per person, per bank or building society, which means joint account holders are eligible for double the protection, or up to £240,000 in total. In addition, savers with certain types of temporary high balances such as proceeds from a house sale, insurance payouts or inheritances can also benefit from increased protection. This limit has increased from £1 million to £1.4 million per depositor per life event. This additional coverage is available for up to six months.

For most savers, the new £120,000 limit will provide adequate protection. However, those with deposits exceeding this amount should consider spreading their savings across multiple banks or building societies to ensure all their funds are covered. It is important to note that if you hold multiple accounts within a single banking group (i.e., banks that share the same banking licence), the £120,000 limit applies to the total amount across all accounts within that banking group, not to each individual account.

You do not need to take any action to benefit from the increased protection. If your bank or building society were to fail, the FSCS would automatically compensate you up to the new limits.

Many modern companies insist on the inclusion of restrictive covenants to limit the freedoms of employees upon the termination of their contracts. However, the High Court recently reinforced the stringent legal principles governing the enforceability of such restrictive covenants, suggesting that they often overstep.

A young man had been working as a salesperson for a UK subsidiary of an American company that sells made-to-measure suits and shirts manufactured in the USA. His original contract included restrictive covenants limited to 6 months. However, the contract was changed in 2022 to double the duration of the non-compete covenant to 12 months and remove the previous reliefs, significantly widening their scope. The employee asserted that he was not informed of these changes, and the claimant failed to produce any evidence to justify the widening of the scope of the limitations or the doubling of their duration.

The employee’s initial performance was strong, although following a conduct issue in January 2025, he was subjected to an addendum requiring humiliating and intrusive conditions, including weekly “counselling”, a ban from earned trips, and exclusion from leadership roles. The ex-employee had also raised product quality concerns, which he felt were ignored, and found the work culture ‘toxic’ and the disciplinary action both unfair and intrusive. As a consequence, he resigned in frustration in 2025, only to be subjected to an “insensitive, verging on brutal” retaliation. Within two days, the HR manager had cut off all IT access, threatened an investigation, and banned the defendant from the office. A day later, on Sunday, the claimant’s lawyers hand-delivered a threatening letter to the defendant’s home seeking to enforce a 12-month restrictive covenant. Moreover, there were claims that the defendant had breached his contractual duties, including running down his sales in the months prior to his resignation, and soliciting staff.

The High Court dismissed the claim for breach of contract and ruled that the 12-month restrictive covenant was unenforceable, as it far exceeded what was reasonably necessary to protect the claimant’s business. Moreover, the Court found the decline in performance to be stress-related and due to his inevitable demotivation.

This case reinforces the longstanding principle that courts will not uphold a covenant if it extends beyond what is strictly necessary to protect an employer’s legitimate business interests, which are typically delimited to confidential information and customer goodwill. The case serves as a warning in relation to the risks employers run when their conduct is perceived to be heavy-handed, humiliating, or toxic, particularly during disciplinary or exit procedures. HR departments should be wary of engaging in overtly humiliating or heavy-handed disciplinary rituals, as these may be viewed as a form of brutality.

Food and energy costs remain central concerns for households and businesses because they influence everything from wages to margins to day to day operating decisions. Inflation is easing compared to the volatility of the last few years, but the picture for the next twelve months is still mixed. Prices appear set to rise more slowly, yet neither category is likely to fall in any meaningful way.

Food price outlook

Food prices surged during the supply chain disruptions of 2021 to 2023 and were pushed higher again by wage pressures, transport costs and global shipping instability. Although the pace of increase has slowed during the past year, prices remain high. Many clients still question why food costs have not dropped as headline inflation falls. The reason is that the underlying conditions that drove those increases have not disappeared. Agriculture, food production, and distribution still face labour shortages, higher input costs, and ongoing uncertainty in global trade routes.

The most likely outcome for the coming year is a gradual easing in the rate of food inflation rather than a reduction in prices. Supermarkets report calmer supply chains and producers appear more willing to absorb cost pressures in order to protect sales volumes. Better harvests in some regions and lower freight costs should also help. These factors together should keep the next year more stable than the recent past.

Energy price outlook

Energy prices have been among the most unpredictable elements of the recent inflation cycle. While the extreme spikes have eased, the underlying global influences remain. The UK is particularly exposed because it relies heavily on imported gas and is tied to international pricing. Global gas markets continue to react to geopolitical tensions, shipping disruptions and variations in European storage levels. These variables explain why energy pricing still carries a degree of uncertainty.

However, the direction for next year looks a little steadier.

What this means for business planning

The next year is unlikely to bring substantial falls in food or energy prices, but the environment should feel less pressured. This increased stability provides an opportunity for better budgeting and more confident forecasting. Hospitality businesses and manufacturers may find it easier to plan pricing strategies, menus and supply arrangements. Broader stability also supports decisions on energy efficiency projects since assumptions about future savings appear more reliable.