An unprecedented leak by the Office for Budget Responsibility means details of Rachel Reeves’s Budget are available before she has even announced them.

I’ve passed the report to an AI for a speed-reading and interpretation of what it means for real people, living in the UK.

What follows may be inaccurate but it’s what I got back, and I’m publishing it to get it out in time for you to compare it with what Reeves says.

Here it is:

🧾 Key measures + broad context

• The Budget removes the “two‑child benefit cap” — ending the policy that limited certain benefits/tax‑credits to only the first two children. The Independent+2Intergenerational Foundation+2
• The national minimum / living wage is being increased (for over‑21s, and for younger workers), giving a pay boost to many lower- and middle‑income workers. Financial Times+1
• The government appears to avoid raising headline income‑tax rates; instead it continues (and may extend) the freeze on income‑tax thresholds (personal allowance, higher-rate threshold), a stealth‑tax device known as “fiscal drag”. British Brief+2The Guardian+2
• The Budget reportedly plans limits or changes to “salary‑sacrifice” pension schemes (i.e. reducing the tax/National Insurance advantages many middle‑ or higher‑income workers use) — a potential hit for savers. The Guardian+1
• On savings and investments: there’s talk of cutting down tax‑free saving allowances (e.g. cash ISA limits) and potentially raising taxes on capital income (dividends, property‑related, etc.). The Guardian+1
• For the public finances: the leaked OBR report (widely cited in media) reportedly raises the government’s “fiscal headroom” — the buffer before hitting fiscal‑sustainability limits. That gives political space for more spending or welfare commitments, but also underpins tax and levy decisions. The Guardian+1

👨‍👩‍👧‍👦 Effects for different types of people

Low‑income families / households (esp. larger families, working poor, benefit‑dependents)

Likely Gains

• Removing the two‑child cap: means more children in multi‑child families get benefit/tax‑credit support — a real boost for household income. That could reduce child poverty and ease pressures on spending for essentials. Intergenerational Foundation+2The Independent+2
• Minimum / living wage increase: for low‑paid workers (younger, part-time, low skill) this raises take‑home pay, helping offset inflation and rising living costs. Financial Times+1
• Some cost-of-living protections: there are mentions of frozen rail fares, maybe control on certain costs, which may help those reliant on public services. The Guardian+1

Risks / Downsides

• “Fiscal drag”: as thresholds stay frozen but wages/inflation rise, more income becomes taxable or taxed at higher rates. That means even modest pay rises could result in a real-terms squeeze on disposable income. British Brief+1
• Hit to savings & pensions: if ISA allowances are cut or pension‑savings perks reduced, those on low‑income + trying to save may get less benefit. Also, reduced long‑term security for people relying on pensions. The Guardian+1

Net effect (likely): Mixed but with potential upside for larger low‑income families and low‑paid workers — gains from benefit reform + wage rise may offset some tax/savings pressures. But only if rising costs don’t outpace those gains.

Middle‑income households (workers, dual‑earner families, modest savers)

Likely Gains

• Workers on lower‑middle incomes benefit from wage increases if they earn near minimum or living wage levels.
• Families with children (especially more than two) benefit from changes to child benefit/tax credit policy.
• Some gains if public spending or social services (health, education, welfare) benefit from the improved fiscal headroom — though impacts may be indirect.

Risks / Downsides

• Fiscal drag may hit many: as wages rise with inflation, many middle‑income earners may see a larger share taxed, meaning real income growth slows or reverses. British Brief+1
• Savings & pension‑planning become tougher: cuts to ISA limits or pension‑savings benefits hit people trying to build wealth. The Guardian+1
• For savers or those relying on investments/dividends/property income: higher taxes on those income streams (capital, dividends, property) may reduce returns. The Guardian+1

Net effect (likely): A squeeze. Some help if household includes low‑paid earner(s) or young children. Otherwise gains may be modest, while “stealth tax” pressures and reduced savings incentives bite over time.

Higher‑income households, savers, property‑owners, retirees

Likely Gains

• Possibly improved public services or welfare overall if headroom is used well (though benefits for wealthy households are minimal).
• If inflation/control measures succeed and economic stability returns, investment returns may stabilise — but that depends heavily on macroeconomic context.

Risks / Downsides

• Reduced pension/savings benefits (salary‑sacrifice restrictions, ISA limit cuts) hit those using those tools — meaning higher‑earners saving or planning for retirement may lose. The Guardian+1
• Higher taxation on capital income, property income, dividends — fewer tax‑advantaged avenues for wealth generation/storage. The Guardian+1
• If tax‑raising measures include property/wealth taxes (as previous talk suggested), those with expensive homes or substantial assets bear the cost — though relative to income, this may be smaller than the effect of fiscal drag on others.

Net effect (likely): Mixed to negative for those relying heavily on savings, investments or capital income. Working‑wealthy may feel pinch on investment/pension returns, while ordinary income may still see “stealth tax” effects.

⚠ Why “headline numbers” may mislead — what to watch out for

• Many of the tax‑increases are stealthy: they don’t raise the headline rate, but freeze thresholds or subtly change savings/pension incentives — slowing the growth of disposable income over time. That’s easy to miss when the Budget speech quotes big‑but‑abstract numbers.
• Gains for lower‑income/vulnerable people (benefits, wage rises) may be offset by higher living costs, inflation, or future tax/levy increases (on savings, property, investment).
• Impact will diverge based on household composition (children? working status? savings?), employment type (full‑time, part‑time, self‑employed), and asset‑ownership. Two households with identical earnings could see quite different outcomes depending on these factors.
• Long‑term effects — on pensions, retirement, savings, inequality — are likely to be more significant than the short‑term “populist” measures. Those often affect wealthier or older households most.

💡 What “real people” should do to navigate this Budget

• If you’re working and on a low or modest wage: check if you benefit from higher wages or benefit changes (e.g. if you have children). That may help you, at least in the short run.
• If you’re saving, investing, or planning pensions: reassess — this Budget seems to penalise some savings‑friendly schemes (ISAs, pensions, dividend/property income). Tax‑efficient status of some types of savings may be eroded.
• For middle‑income households: don’t assume modest pay rises keep pace with inflation — “stealth taxes” may eat up gains. Budget carefully.
• Consider that long‑term stability (public services, welfare safety net, pensions) depends on how the government uses its “fiscal headroom.” If public‑service funding improves, many may gain — but if headroom is used for servicing debt or for benefits/wealthier households, ordinary people may see little benefit.