John Healey is facing pressure to clarify whether he permitted a market-sensitive budget leak that moved bank share prices ahead of his budget statement. Meg Hillier, chair of the Commons Treasury select committee, has written to the Treasury and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to investigate whether a Bloomberg story published more than an hour before the budget might be considered an improper release of inside information about changes to the bank corporation tax surcharge.
Shortly before Healey left Downing Street to deliver his budget statement in the Commons at 12.30pm, the prices of shares in banks moved as Bloomberg had published a story at 10.45am noting the bank corporation tax surcharge would be lower than the 8% that lenders had feared, and the increase would only be temporary.
In a letter to James Bowler, the permanent secretary of the Treasury, and the chief executive of the FCA, Hillier wrote: "There were two elements to the Bloomberg story, namely that the bank surcharge would not reach 8% and that it would be temporary. HM Treasury's Budget 2026 confirmed the following: 'Bank Surcharge: Temporarily increase the Bank Corporation Tax Surcharge rate from 3% to 6%, to fund breathing space measures for households, for 15 months from 1 January 2027'. The Bloomberg story quoted 'people familiar with the matter'. This appears to have been more than idle speculation, and it had implications for relevant securities."
Writing directly to the FCA, Hillier noted the body's responsibility for “market cleanliness” and its implementation of the UK's Market Abuse Regulation, adding: “I would welcome your view on whether this event might be considered an improper release of inside information and your assessment of its impact on the market in relevant securities.” Separately, she urged Bowler to confirm that banks or any representatives of them or their trade bodies were not told of the changes in outline or with specifics before the budget, and how many people had access to the information.
Healey confirmed the surcharge would rise from 3% to 6% for 15 months from 1 January 2027 as he told MPs: "I am looking to our banks to help fund breathing space for British families. And so banks will pay an extra 3% on the bank surcharge. This will be time-limited to pay for immediate support on energy bills, starting in January, ending 15 months later."
Commons sources are concerned that bankers were able to make money from the measures that were leaked to Bloomberg an hour and a half before they were confirmed. The chancellor will be asked to explain the leak when he appears before the Commons Treasury select committee next month.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The integrity of budget secrecy and market fairness is at stake, with implications for investor confidence if inside information is mishandled.
- The FCA investigation could set a precedent for how leaks of market-sensitive government announcements are treated under UK market abuse rules.
- The controversy adds political pressure on Healey early in his tenure, with the Treasury committee seeking assurances that banks did not gain an unfair advantage.
Background
The UK budget is a major fiscal event that sets tax and spending plans for the year ahead. The bank corporation tax surcharge is an additional levy on bank profits; lenders had feared it might rise to 8%, but the budget set a temporary increase to 6% for 15 months to fund household energy bill support. The Bloomberg story, citing anonymous sources, was published at 10.45am, before Healey's 12.30pm statement, and bank shares moved on the news.
Key Perspectives
Meg Hillier: says the Bloomberg story appeared to be more than idle speculation and asks the FCA to assess whether it involved an improper release of inside information, and urges the Treasury to confirm banks were not told in advance.
John Healey: confirmed the surcharge increase as a temporary measure to fund breathing space for households, saying banks will pay an extra 3% for 15 months starting January 2027.
What to Watch
- Healey's appearance before the Treasury select committee next month, where he will be asked to explain the leak.
- The FCA's assessment of whether the leak violated market abuse regulations and its potential enforcement action.
- Any further revelations about who provided the information to Bloomberg and how many Treasury officials had access to the figures.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 12 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedThe headline says Healey faces questions over a budget leak that moved bank shares.World news | The Guardian: “John Healey faces questions over budget leak that moved bank share prices.”
- SupportedThe summary says Meg Hillier wrote to the Treasury and FCA about a possible improper release of inside information.World news | The Guardian: “Meg Hillier, has written to the Treasury and the Financial Conduct Authority watchdog (FCA) to assess whether a story leaked to Bloomberg, and published more than an hour before the budget was revealed, led to an “improper release of inside information”.”
- SupportedHealey is facing pressure to clarify whether he permitted a market-sensitive budget leak ahead of his statement that moved bank share prices.World news | The Guardian: “John Healey is facing pressure to clarify whether he permitted a market-sensitive budget leak ahead of his statement, which moved bank share prices.”
- SupportedBloomberg published its story at 10.45am, more than an hour before the budget; bank share prices moved shortly before Healey left to deliver his statement at 12.30pm.World news | The Guardian: “Shortly before Healey left Downing Street to deliver his budget statement in the Commons at 12.30pm, the prices of shares in banks moved as Bloomberg had published a story at 10.45am”
- SupportedBloomberg’s story said the bank surcharge would be lower than the 8% lenders had feared and that the increase would be temporary.World news | The Guardian: “noting the bank corporation tax surcharge would be lower than the 8% that lenders had feared, and the increase would only be temporary.”
- SupportedHillier’s letter said: “There were two elements to the Bloomberg story, namely that the bank surcharge would not reach 8% and that it would be temporary.”World news | The Guardian: ““There were two elements to the Bloomberg story, namely that the bank surcharge would not reach 8% and that it would be temporary.”
- SupportedHillier noted the FCA’s responsibility for “market cleanliness” and the UK’s Market Abuse Regulation, then asked whether the event might be an improper release of inside information and what its market impact was.World news | The Guardian: “Writing directly to the FCA, Hillier noted the body’s responsibility for “market cleanliness” and its implementation of “the UK’s Market Abuse Regulation”, adding, “I would welcome your view on whether this event might be considered an improper release of inside information and your assessment of its impact on the market in relevant securities.””
- SupportedHillier urged Bowler to confirm whether banks or their representatives had been told of the changes before the budget and how many people had access to the information.World news | The Guardian: “she urged Bowler to confirm “that banks (or any representatives of them or their trade bodies) were not told of the changes in outline or with specifics before” the budget and “how many people had access to the information””
- SupportedThe surcharge would rise from 3% to 6% for 15 months from 1 January 2027.World news | The Guardian: “‘Bank Surcharge: Temporarily increase the Bank Corporation Tax Surcharge rate from 3% to 6%, to fund breathing space measures for households, for 15 months from 1 January 2027’.”
- SupportedHealey said: “I am looking to our banks to help fund breathing space for British families. And so banks will pay an extra 3% on the bank surcharge. This will be time-limited to pay for immediate support on energy bills, starting in January, ending 15 months later.”World news | The Guardian: ““I am looking to our banks to help fund breathing space for British families. And so banks will pay an extra 3% on the bank surcharge. This will be time-limited to pay for immediate support on energy bills, starting in January, ending 15 months later.””
- SupportedCommons sources are concerned that bankers were able to make money from the measures leaked to Bloomberg an hour and a half before confirmation.World news | The Guardian: “Commons sources are concerned that bankers were able to make money out of the measures that were leaked to Bloomberg an hour and a half before the measures were confirmed.”
- SupportedThe chancellor will be asked to explain the leak when he appears before the Commons Treasury select committee next month.World news | The Guardian: “The chancellor will be asked to explain this leak when he appears before the Commons Treasury select committee next month.”