Inflation rockets to 4%

John Fitzsimons
by Lovemoney Staff John Fitzsimons on 15 February 2011  |  Comments 17 comments

Inflation now stands at double the Bank of England's target.

Inflation rockets to 4%

The Office for National Statistics has confirmed that the cost of living has jumped yet again, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) annual inflation rate rising to 4% - double the Bank of England’s target.

The figure represents a rise from 3.7% in December, with CPI now at its highest level since November 2008.

A second measure of inflation, the Retail Prices Index (which includes things like mortgage costs) also rose in January, to 5.1% from 4.8% in December.

What it means

Inflation, very simply, tells us how the general cost of living is changing.

The Office of National Statistics uses a basket of goods to calculate how prices have changed over the month. And with inflation consistently on the rise over the last couple of years, it tells us that everyday life is getting more expensive.

The losers

All sorts of different people suffer when inflation is rising. All of us on stable salaries are losers when inflation jumps – while the cost of living goes up, our salaries do not. As a result, your money does not stretch as far as it did previously.

This puts pressure on employers to increase pay, meaning they face higher costs, which can force them to put up prices... and so the inflationary spiral continues.

Related blog post

Pensioners have suffered the most as a result of inflation in recent times. That’s because the inflation they feel has been substantially higher than the official figure, as things they tend to spend more than the rest of us on (utilities for example) have seen the largest rises, while areas where prices have fallen significantly, like mortgages, have been of less relevance to older people, who will likely have already finished paying for their home.

This inaccuracy between the official rate of inflation, and the actual rate, makes financial planning for those in or nearing retirement far more difficult.

For more on how older people are whacked by inflation, have a read of Scary truth about our substandard pensions.

The final big set of losers with rising inflation is the nation’s savers. In order to beat inflation, a basic rate taxpayer will now need to find an account paying 5%, while higher rate taxpayers need to save at a rate of 6.67%.

Needless to say, there aren’t too many accounts offering deals like that at the moment. Indeed, according to Moneyfacts, the number of accounts that beat inflation for basic rate taxpayers has plummeted from 118 in September to just 23 today, of which 21 are ISAs. But don't despair - read the new savings account that beats inflation for tips on where to put your money.

And with many pensions relying on their savings income, it's a double whammy for the UK's older population.

Why it’s rising

So, why is inflation on the rise to such a degree? According to the Office of National Statistics, there are a number of factors behind inflation heading north.

Transport

Firstly, there are transport costs. There is the price of oil, which has led to petrol prices reaching an average of £1.27 per litre, a new record high. But you also have to take into account the rise in fuel duty, while the costs of purchasing a new car have jumped 2.4% from December to January. Indeed, even the price of second-hand cars has increased by 2%.

Booze and fags

The cost of alcoholic beverages and tobacco rose by a record 4.6% between December and January, with whisky and vodka prices in particular rising sharply. And tobacco products jumped 2.9% too.

Restaurants and hotels

Within this category, prices rose by 1.3% between December and January, another record monthly increase. Once again, the rising prices of alcoholic beverages played a big part in this.

Sterling

Add to all of this the fact that the value of Sterling has been pretty poor for quite a while now. As the pound gets weaker, it doesn't stretch so far, further pushing prices up.

The role of VAT

Now, many people, including the Office of National Statistics itself, is pointing the finger at this year’s rise in VAT to a rate of 20%.

And clearly, it does not help. After all, there was a 2.5 percentage point rise in VAT in January last year too, and CPI inflation at that point jumped to 3.5%.

However, there is an argument that VAT on its own will not boost inflation. Inflation is an annual measure of the rise in prices, and as there was a 2.5 point rise last year too, it simply means that inflation will not fall compared to last year, rather than that it increase further.

What happens next?

The Bank of England is tasked with keeping inflation under control, and operates with a target of 2% for CPI. However, inflation has been at least 1% ahead of this target for more than a year, putting pressure on the Bank of England to act.

Donna Werbner looks at how much you can save by quitting smoking.

Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, has to write to the Treasury when inflation reaches a level 1% above target, and then every three months afterwards, to explain why inflation is rising and what the Bank of England plans to do about it. Needless to say, Mr King has been writing a lot of letters of late.

The most obvious course of action for the Bank of England to take would be to increase bank base rate, a traditional measure to dampen inflation. However, that appears unlikely, for the time being anyway. In his letter, King highlights that while inflation is likely to rise to nearly 5% in the coming months, that will be largely due to rising commodity and energy prices, and that such factors will wane in time, bringing inflation back under control.

It’s worth noting however that King acknowledges there are differences within the Monetary Policy Committee over what to do next. As a result, imminent rises in base rate cannot be completely ruled out.

Can I do anything?

In truth, there’s not a vast amount that you can do about inflation. If you have cash in savings, it’s well worth spending a bit of extra time to ensure you find an account that will beat inflation, limited though your choice may be.

And it’s worth looking at ways to cut your cost of living. That could mean downgrading from your current supermarket of choice, switching your energy provider or broadband deal, or just using your car as little as possible.

Sadly, inflation is not going anywhere for a while.

More: The new savings account that beats inflation | Seven ways to maximise your savings in 2011

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (17)

  • Aquasponge
    Love rating 38
    Aquasponge said

    The MPC have lost control and creditability. In Jan10 they said that that CPI would be 1.5% in Jan11 – it was actually 3.7% this Jan and now 4% this Feb.

    Anyone who hides behind the “underlying” trend instead of the actual numbers in the month are normally trying to deceive you. Its like saying that if we strip all the murders out of the figures then NY would be a safe city.

    I used to spend a lot of time down at Dell and we continually complained about our arch enemy (HP) results. Each year they would strip out “one-off” charges to hopefully fool investors that their business model was a lot leaner than it actually was. Of course these one-offs happened every year and were not one-off at all but a cost of them doing business (before anyone shouts, more recently I have spend a bit of time within HP and can happily say that the “one-offs” are fewer now).

    The UK economy is sick. The UK consumer is worse, so sick many actually believe that if interest rates went up to 1.5%, thousands upon thousands would default…. The impotent MPC now hide behind the “lets wait and see” mantra – “maybe we can have an early night next year”. Me, I would order some Viagra and get the job done.

    Report on 15 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • AFlondon
    Love rating 18
    AFlondon said

    Interest rates needed to rise several months ago. I would be more convinced that the MotleyFool was worried about inflation if I didn't know that when the rates do go up, the MotleyFool will be crying over the effect upon mortgagors (whom the MotleyFool calls "homeowners").

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • stalwart99
    Love rating 3
    stalwart99 said

    Abandon ship everyone, the momentum is growing, Aqua and Af at the front reconfirming the sensible option to increase rates with no thought of the consequenses.Those poor savers not recieving adequate interest on their already comfortable positions, perhaps theyd trade their increased returns for where they are now when their less fortunate neighbours raid their cabbage patches to feed their kids.Raising interest rates will not curb inflation when the factors for the increase in inflation are so artificial so be careful for what you wish and how about aborting the human rights act as a sensible approach to getting the country back on its feet

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • IPINLive
    Love rating 13
    IPINLive said

    As the article suggests, you can only move with what inflation dictates and hope that your changes offset the rising cost of living. Whilst interest rates might rise, unfortunately the huge rise in things like gold (which has always been billed as the "hedge" against inflation) is largely to blame at the moment.

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • gr8it
    Love rating 6
    gr8it said

    Well said Stlalwart... this inflation bubble is not driven by consumers, in fact, that is precisely why MK is worried about increasing interest rates, he knows when the commodity issues and VAT fall out of the equation with stiffled income and unemployment having a massive impact on spending power in the UK, we could quickly head into negative inflation (c.12 months time).

    The biggest problem for the Government is tax receipts, these are not going up to compensate for the loss of business and jobs, in fact the opposite.

    If there was a way that they could increase tax receipts to eliminate the deficit quicker, that would be a good plan, increasing tax directly or indirectly is hugely unpopular, but so are low interest rates for the wealthy or 'cash rich', which includes many businesses.

    I think they should increase tax receipts by offering a cashback scheme on prepaid tax for the current year and up to 5 years ahead. By taking the revenue earlier in the cycle, although its wooden dollars, they can utilise the money to pay off the deficit earlier in the cycle too, reducing the burden on the public purse, lifting the need to cut services so badly and boosting the fragile economy. At the same time giving businesses and savers a guaranteed income on their cash, at a better rate than they can achieve elsewhere.

    Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul?? Maybe, but in effect Peters money is already earmarked as debt repayment, we would effectively be winding the tax receipt clock forward, without the cost of the next 5 years expentiture at the same time. 

    One the deficit is eliminated, and the balance sheet is healthy again, slowly phase out the pre-payment/ cashback scheme.

    I cant see where else they can raise the money from, the economy is crippled at the moment and too high a % of the workforce betweeen 16 and 30 are unemployed, with another 40% approaching retirement. Nightmare scenario and a massive squeeze for the falling workforce population.

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • fnm500
    Love rating 4
    fnm500 said

    Can we do anything? Sure! Drink less booze & smoke less fags (both good for you), work more from home, eat more at home (also good for you), have your vacations in the UK (good for the UK), buy less things in general or buy used or recycled items..Inflation should correct itself sooner rather than later.

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Mike10613
    Love rating 599
    Mike10613 said

    I bought a bond that apys 4.15% about 18 months ago; it matures in September. I bought gold at $700 an ounce and I got a return of 7% in the past year from Zopa. I think I'm winning against both CPI at 4% and RPI at over 5% but I really need to win against food prices rising at around 10% and petrol prices soaring. We do have our personal inflation rate though; we don;t spend all our cash on food or petrol. We can cut down a one commentator has suggested; I have already stopped all my vices though! I can put more into things like Zopa though:

    http://uk.zopa.com/member/Mike10613

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • SevenPillars
    Love rating 70
    SevenPillars said

    The latest from the BoE is that inflation will stay high for another year, which is a little like a worn record considering that for several years now they have been predicting lower inflation 6-12 months down the line. Usually, the Bank has been woefully wrong on these predictions, yet IR's stay low because to raise them would apparently hurt the wider economy. That may be so, but it will only hurt the inflationary economy that they and other central banks have created.

    The BoE faces a credibility problem on 3 fronts.

    1) Their remit is to fight inflation and to keep CPI within a 2-3% range, yet the longer CPI stays above this without them doing anything simply tells you that we have been lied to all along.

    2) If inflation is mainly coming from overseas and raising UK IR's will not stop this, then there is no policy at all! Most of the UK's inflation for some time has been imported, simply because most of our commodities and goods now come from overseas. UK business can only absorb so much of these costs before they start passing them on.

    3) When the financial markets collapsed in 2007-8, the BoE, like other Central Banks showed their true colours in what they really feared was asset price deflation and the deleveraging that caused it. As the prices of assets started to fall the game would be up for many of the investment banks and speculators that relied so heavily on them going up. A policy of low IR's is deliberately designed to help create inflation, epecially in assets. Unfortunately, the link between other price inflation which is often included in the CPI and RPI and asset price inflation is not a clear one. For example, house price inflation is not included in any index, but mortgage IR's are in the RPI. Hence, low IR's come about on the back of low CPI = low mortgage rates as a part of RPI = no reflection of the real cost of housing. Magic!

    I think the inflationists at the BoE are now in a right mess. If it is true that they cannot control the inported inflation, then the BoE serves no purpose whatsover in its current role. It is merely a front for a supposed separation of responsibility that government use to have. Effectively, they are putting the white flag out on inflation because what they are really relying on is the commodity producing countries to lower their prices and reduce our price inflation! Long term this is unlikely to happen, after all, look at the price of oil. When the price collapsed in 2008 did petrol prices fall? Not much, they are higher now even though the price of oil is much lower than the high of $147 in 2008.

    One other thing, it might help if they stopped printing money for their banker friends like there is no tomorrow.

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Aquasponge
    Love rating 38
    Aquasponge said

    It’s good to see we have a whole spectrum of opinions. Some think we should deal with the problem by raising rates, others think we should deal with the problem by doing nothing and another idea is to deal with the problem by stealing from future generations.

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • RocketSteve
    Love rating 30
    RocketSteve said

    It was way back in the 60's that it was prooved lowering taxes increased revenue for the government! Go figure Cameron's methods. Listening to the wrong people perhaps?

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Aquasponge
    Love rating 38
    Aquasponge said

    RocketSteve you make a very good point. The Laffer curve was discussed by John Maynard Keynes before the second world war and represents the rate of taxation at which maximum revenue is generated – taxable income elasticity. This idea was re-visited again by Laffer after the war and was popularised by Jude Wanniski in the 1970s.

    Of course all brilliant ideas are unspotted plagiarism and as far as I’m aware the first recorded writings on this topic date back to Ibn Khaldun from the 14th century. Cameron and team understand this theory but also recognise that the vast majority of the British public would struggle with it.

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • oldhenry
    Love rating 265
    oldhenry said

    Why are we payng King his vast salary and putting loads into his enormous pension? he is just carrying out government orders to inflate the debt away. It is theft and he knows it . He should be sacked we do not need theives is that position. Of course interest rates should rise as they £ should rise this reducing imported inflation. The Governmenr rob us in tax and in interest , meanwhile desperate to keep inflated house prices high to infer that that people have some wealth. But the government will have that when they are old now - so why bother?

    Report on 16 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Ed Bowsher
    Love rating 78
    Ed Bowsher said

    "It was way back in the 60's that it was prooved lowering taxes increased revenue for the government!"

    Hi Steve,

    It's not quite as simple as that. Not all economists agree 100% with the Laffer curve principle.

    And just look at recent history. Clinton increased taxes in the 90s, the US had a long period of strong economic growth, and the government's finances were pretty sound.

    Bush then cut taxes in the noughties and the government's finances are now a total mess. (Bush's tax cuts aren't the only factor behind the massive deficit, but they are a significant one.)

    Ed

    Bush cut taxes in the noughties and the

    Report on 18 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Aquasponge
    Love rating 38
    Aquasponge said

    Hi Ed, you are of course correct on the Laffe curve. Theories are just theories and where politics and tax are concerned then there are always valid reasons for and against. Of course time frames are the key for this policy and as previously touched on, democracies have to go to the electorate every four or five years or so and a large portion of the electorate would never get the theory.

    Your US example is an interesting one and kinda proves the point.  I would throw Hong Kong into the mix and also link the Hong Kong example with the more recent success within China.  

    While we are on theories, and related to this topic, there is no better theory for understanding our current financial state today than the Karl Marx theory on creative destruction. This goes a long way to help understand why the MPC are scared stiff to do anything – the old guard could be completely wiped out.

    Report on 18 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • dmhzx
    Love rating 26
    dmhzx said

    All that putting up interest rates will do is to give even more money to the parasitic banks

    It will have no effect on inflation because most of it is driven by speculators (commoodity proces) and our own goovernment. - Commuting costs by car or public transport, are fundamentally governemnt controled. VTA and duty rises

    Of ocurse all he financil people are in favour of interest rises. How else can they continue to get 40% pay rises each year?

    Thank goodnees Mervyn King is (for the time being) looking after the interests of the whole country. -Shame that the government isn't.

    Report on 19 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • gr8it
    Love rating 6
    gr8it said

    Aquasponge you say the solution I posted was stealing from the future, think again. The money from future tax receipts is already earmarked to pay the interest we are accruing on a debt we are not repaying. I am suggesting that for the people with money in the bank earning 0.2% interest and with the UK debt costing the tax payers a great deal more as we owe the money to foreign investers, we pay the interest into our own economy (our savers and cash rich) with a lesser margin that we are paying overseas, and at the same time, we repay that foreign debts. This reduces future interest in 'potentially' one very quick step, the difference is that the interest stays in the UK and boosts the economy. 

    The last Labour government has already committed the UK economy and tax payer to steal from the future generations, I'm giving them a solution to pull us from the abyss and improve the UK economy immediately. Its wooden dollars but it produces a magic trick. 

    We've already spent it and its costing us money, so pay it off now with the receipts that would otherwise not be here for up to 5 years. Once the balance shows £0 or goes into the black, we immediately remove the burden of interest on the UK economy, which is every man woman and child £3000 per year each. Or to put it another way, £10,000 per year for each household. Frankly, I dont know many households that earn enough to pay £10,000 in tax every year, so this is an accumulative problem, its not getting smaller and cutting services is just pissing in the wind and crippling the economy. 

    Dont just criticise an idea because its innovative, if you have a criticism with an idea, explain why it wont work and if your argument is sound, I will think again.

    Report on 20 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Aquasponge
    Love rating 38
    Aquasponge said

    Gr8it, I like your idea. It is well thought through.

    No matter how you wrap it up though, any idea that taxes future income or pushes current cost into the future (PFI) is stealing from future generations.

    Having said that, we are almost on the same page. If you agree that an asset only has value because of its future income generating ability or future sales value, then why not shift the tax burden. Why not match the assets value to the tax receipt. Same result but the people who benefit from the asset/gain would also pay the cost. Shifting losses onto future generations or privatising profits and socialising loses drives the wrong behaviour.

    Taxing income, whether current or future, produces unproductive assets. We currently have over 600,000 empty homes in this country (some figures point to a much larger number) – enough said.

    I’ll finish with a summarised version of the Jubilee line in London. The Jubilee line cost c.£6Bn to build and was funding, in large, by general taxation. This meant that people all over the country paid higher income tax, corporation tax, VAT, fuel duty, etc. etc.. Most of the people who paid the higher tax burden will never use or benefit from the investment. The people who benefited most from the investment were the people in London that lived along or close to the new line.

    The properties along the Jubilee line increased in value by over £10Bn directly due to the £6Bn investment. Taxing this increase in value would still generate a £4Bn capital increase to the owners along the line and everybody else could enjoy lower taxation.

    In summary, don’t tax the future income generating ability of the asset – tax the current value of the asset.

    Of course, amassing unproductive assets and avoiding taxation is what a lot of people have enjoyed for years, so why rock the boat? 

    Report on 21 February 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 26Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 26 months (3.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable)

Barclaycard 25Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 25 months (2.4% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.5% to 2.4% (T&Cs apply)

Halifax BT 25 Month MasterCard

0% for 25 months (2.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 19.0% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV1