Retail trade union Usdaw has joined with Labour MPs and the Retail Jobs Alliance (RJA) to call on the Government to exempt all shops from the higher business-rates multiplier.
New research reveals that existing cost pressures could result in 90,000 retail job losses over the next five years.
The call follows Labour Party Conference, where delegates passed a motion tabled by Usdaw urging the Government to exempt all bricks-and-mortar shops from the higher business-rates multiplier. On Tuesday, the Chancellor met retail, hospitality and leisure chief executives for pre-budget talks.
The RJA warns that easing the burden on hospitality, while raising it on retail, risks weakening the very town centres the Government wants to support. Large stores often act as anchors, drawing the footfall that sustains surrounding businesses and providing accessible employment opportunities.
Joanne Thomas - Usdaw general secretary said: “Job security is a key priority for our members. We support the Government’s commitment to ‘growth in every postcode’ and the retail sector has a significant role to play in delivering this. We welcome the action the Government has already taken in reducing business rates for pubs, clubs and live music venues. Alongside this, Labour has a manifesto commitment to level the playing field between in-store retail and online giants. So, confirmation from the Chancellor that the Government will be producing a high streets strategy is welcome, but it is essential that it is linked to the wider industrial strategy, including exempting large retail premises from the higher rates multiplier.”
Kim Johnson, Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside, said: “This Government's manifesto promised to level the playing field between the high street and online giants, and that promise matters more than ever. Cutting business rates for pubs, clubs and live music venues was absolutely right, but retail can't be left picking up the bill for it. The sector already pays more than its fair share in business rates, risking jobs here in Liverpool Riverside and across the country. Retail is one of the first jobs many people ever have, and at a time of a NEETs crisis, we cannot afford for those pathways to be at risk.”
Tracy Gilbert, Labour MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, said: “The Government must honour its manifesto commitment to a fairer playing field for high street shops competing with online giants. Shops already carry a disproportionate business rates burden, and adding to it would put jobs and investment under further pressure.
"For many young people, retail offers that crucial first step into employment. With too many young people out of education, employment or training, we should be opening those doors, not making it harder to get through them.”
One in three retail workers are employed in the roughly 4,000 stores above the £500,000 rateable-value threshold. New research from the Retail Jobs Alliance predicts that, even with no further changes, existing cost pressures could cost the sector around 90,000 jobs by 2031, hitting young people and already-struggling towns hardest. The figure projects forward the fall in retail employees in official HMRC and ONS data since 2023. The RJA warns that any further rise in the higher multiplier would push losses well beyond that.
Retail already pays a share of business rates more than four times its contribution to UK GDP. The previous Autumn Budget alone added around £7 billion in new costs and taxes to the sector, and the RJA warns that a further rise in the higher multiplier would leave large stores less able to protect jobs, hold down prices and invest in their communities.
Martin Beck, spokesperson for the Retail Jobs Alliance (RJA), said: “Retailers are already absorbing additional costs, and further increases in business rates would inevitably affect their ability to protect jobs, invest in stores and keep prices down. This new research highlights that ministers must proceed carefully, because when the cost of running shops rises, the consequences are felt not only by retail workers and high streets, but also by households through added pressure on the cost of living.”