ALMOST one million individuals on benefits are missing out on billions of pounds in extra payments, new figures reveal.

These people do receive benefits, but their needs have increased since their initial claims, and they have not yet received the additional support they are entitled to.

1

For the first time, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has published a report providing these figures.

The report reveals that nearly one million people are missing out on approximately £3.1billion in extra payments in 2023/24, up from £2.3billion in 2022/23.

Those with active claims for disability living allowance, personal independence payments (PIP), and Universal Credit were most likely to be affected, which could leave them up to £2,900 a year worse off.

Previously, the DWP only offered separate statistics on the number of people claiming each benefit and the amounts they receive, as well as the number of people who do not claim benefits they are entitled to and the amounts they are missing out on.

The new report, however, highlights the issue of “unfulfilled” benefits – where claimants are not receiving all the benefits components they qualify for.

Examples of “unfulfilled” benefits include:

• A person who initially claims a disability benefit but whose condition worsens potentially qualifies for a higher rate of benefit that they have not applied for.
• Someone receiving help with rent through Universal Credit who has not reported an increased rent since their last assessment.
• An individual whose savings have decreased since their last assessment, making them eligible for more benefit

Steve Webb, former pensions minister and partner at LCP, said: “There is understandable focus on people who miss out completely on benefits to which they are entitled. 

“But this new report shines a helpful light on another reason why people may be missing out on billions of pounds in benefits. 

“These are cases where people’s circumstances have changed since they first claimed benefit and would now be entitled to extra help but have not updated DWP. “

MOST UNFULFILLED BENEFITS

The three largest benefits, accounting for around three quarters of “unfulfilled” benefit expenditure are:

• Personal independence payment (PIP) – £870million (around £2,900 for each claim affected)
• Disability living allowance (DLA) – £750million (around £2,500 for each claim affected)
• Universal Credit – £730million (around £2,100 for each claim affected)

The DWP estimates that over 300,000 people on PIP qualify for bigger payments.

Millions of households suffering from a long-term illness, disability or mental health condition can get extra help through personal PIP.

PIP has two parts, both of which are assessed separately.

Whether you get one or both depends on how severely your condition affects you.

If you need help getting out or moving around, you may qualify for the mobility part of PIP.

The weekly rate is either £28.70 or £75.75.

The weekly rate for the daily living part of PIP is either £72.65 or £105.55.

You could get up to £184.30 a week if you qualify for both components.

According to DWP data, individuals with “unfulfilled” PIP claims could increase their payments by up to £2,900 annually.

A further 300,000 DLA claimants are thought to be missing out on boosted payments worth up to £2,500 a year, too.

The benefit provides extra support for people who have care or mobility needs.

DLA is been replaced by PIP and attendance allowance.

However, if you still claim the benefit, you could report a change in circumstances and get your payments boosted in the meantime.

The DWP’s new report also shows that around 350,000 Universal Credit claimants are missing out on an extra £2,100 a year in payments.

Universal Credit is a monthly payment to help with your living costs. 

How much money you’ll get depends on your circumstances, but the monthly standard allowance is £393.45 for a single person over 25 and £617.60 for a couple who are both over that age.

If you have a disability or health condition, or if your child does, there are extra top-ups you can get in your Universal Credit award.

If you rent, you can also get help towards those costs and any service fees you might pay.

Steve Webb added: “I would encourage anyone on a disability benefit whose condition has worsened or anyone on a housing benefit whose rent has gone up to make sure that DWP are aware of their latest situation. 

“Anyone on a means-tested benefit who has seen their savings fall since they were last assessed should also update the DWP. 

“We need to ensure that all benefits are paid on the basis of people’s current needs and not their situation months or years ago.”

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

The gambling industry generates excitement by advertising long-odds possibilities rather than expected outcomes. For example:

Ministers are considering a tax raid of up to £3bn on the gambling sector as Rachel Reeves casts around for funds to shore up the public finances.

Treasury officials are understood to be weighing up proposals, put forward by two influential thinktanks and backed by one of the party’s top five individual donors, to double some of the taxes levied on online casinos and bookmakers.

Advertisement

Measures could be included in this month’s budget, Labour’s first in 14 years, as the chancellor tries to plug the £22bn “black hole” that she claimed to have found in the nation’s finances after taking office.

Sources familiar with the discussions said the Treasury had yet to make a decision but appeared receptive to tweaking the UK’s complex regime of betting and gaming duties to raise extra funds of between £900m and £3bn, despite opposition from industry lobbyists.

The Guardian story above is by Rob Davies, author of one excellent book and several hundred stories about UK gambling. It’s safe to assume his sources are very well-informed.

Nonetheless, perspectives seemed to shift between the Guardian’s report late on Friday and Monday’s London market open. Per today’s FT:

[O]ne government figure told the Financial Times that ministers are not planning such a tax raid on the gambling industry in the Budget on October 30.

That’s after gambling industry types mobilised over the weekend to voice their well-rehearsed arguments about how higher levies would kill HMRC’s golden goose, drive the industry underground and/or towards unregulated markets, displease The Palace, etc. There’s a Betting & Gaming Council press release from Friday that lists all the main talking points, which means we don’t have to.

Reactions from the sellside have been similarly feverish. Here’s Jefferies’ analyst James Wheatcroft:

The proposals apparently being considered would all but wipe out bookmaker profitability in the UK, per our estimates. The headlines highlight that changing tax (and regulation) is a legitimate concern when investing in gaming companies, but the extent of these proposals seems unrealistic.

And here’s Barclays’ Brandt Montour:

While the article appears credible, the proposed changes (a doubling of most tax rates within one of the proposals) seem egregious to us, and will likely raise realistic concerns over anti-competitive impacts (most small operators would likely close-down) as well as giving a substantial boost to the black market. 

The Guardian report refers to two think-tank papers. The Institute for Public Policy Research has suggested doubling the general betting duty levied on high-street bookmakers from 15 per cent to 30 per cent and raising online gaming duty to 50 per cent. The Social Market Foundation proposes a flat 42 per cent duty for online wagers, which are currently charged at 21 per ent for casino games and 15 per cent for sports betting.

Yikes, say JPMorgan analysts Estelle Weingrod and Karan Puri:

We view both these recommendations as excessive and detrimental to the overall regulated UK gaming market. Moves of such magnitude would not only lead to operators exiting the (unattractive) UK market, but would also lead to overall less favorable terms for the players as licensed operators will (i) offer less attractive pricing/odds and, and (ii) reduce their bonusing/promotions spend in order to preserve some level of profitability for their UK business. In return, this would drive players to the black market, which, to a large extent, defeats the purpose of having a regulated market in the first place, given inability to protect the players who choose to play with illegal offshore operators, especially at a time when the UK Gambling white paper was about to be finally implemented (expectations towards early ‘25). Also worth noting that generally, more stringent regulation typically offers the opportunity for scale operators to consolidate the industry further as small/sub-scale operators struggle to mitigate the adverse impact as effectively, eventually exiting the market.

Flutter, Entain and Evoke (formerly known as 888) are the bookmaker stocks most exposed to UK politics. Flutter takes 19 per cent of its revenue from the UK, nearly all of which is online. Entain’s 29 per cent UK by revenue, the small majority of which is from the Ladbrokes Coral estate. Evoke is 68 per cent UK by revenue, of which 39 per cent is online.

JPMorgan forecasts that for Flutter, doubling the remote gaming duty would knock 62 per cent off its UK online Ebitda. At a group level that cuts 2025 Ebitda by 18 per cent, it says.

Reduced advertising spend, worse odds for punters, shop closures and job losses might mitigate the effect, while the closure of small bookies should ultimately benefit the big ones. These mitigation measures can cut the annual Ebitda hit to 10 per cent for Flutter and 17 per cent for Entain, says Citi.

Morgan Stanley’s numbers are similar:

Most analysts don’t bother running detailed forecasts, however, because they don’t see the point. Here’s Goodbody analyst David Brohan:

While it is clear the focus will now be on tax increases for the sector in the upcoming budget, we expect any increases to be moderate in line with the economic importance of the industry. The last tax increase in the UK was in 2019 when the rate of Remote Gaming Duty increased from 15% to 21%, and the UK tax rates are at the lower end of International peers. Our base case assumption is that sports betting duty is likely to remain unchanged (given the emotive issue of horse racing funding, and the challenges associated with increasing this duty). Remote Gaming Duty appears to be an easier target, however we would expect a much more moderate level of increase (3-5%) is a realistic expectation. In terms of impact to operators within our coverage, we estimate every 1% increase in Remote Gaming Duty to impact Adjusted EBITDA by 0.6% for Flutter, 0.7% for Entain, 1.6% for Evoke and 2% for Rank. These estimates are on a pre-mitigation basis with operators having several levers to pull including reduced promo/marketing to mitigate some of the impact.

It’s familiar territory. All the same arguments about protecting jobs and horseracing were aired after bumf accompanying the 2023 autumn statement mentioned a consultation on remote gaming taxes. Efforts to restrict UK fixed-odds betting terminals rumbled on for years and involved many of the same appeals to the greater good. More recently, French gambling stocks dropped on a report of duty reforms similar to these latest UK proposals that appears to have been quietly forgotten.

Gambling regulation does change, but the power of the lobby all-but-guarantees that it won’t change quickly or unexpectedly. And it plays straight into the industry’s interests when every suggestion for reform can be framed from the off as an existential threat.

Further reading:
— Shed no tears for bleating bookmakers (FT)

One in four adults think they have ADHD and social media is driving trend for self-diagnosis.

One in four adults think they have ‘hidden’ ADHD — with social media driving a wave of self-diagnosis, scientists have claimed.

According to academics, social media is fuelling a surge in self-diagnosis of ADHD, with one in four adults believing they have “hidden” ADHD.

Related: 5 Highly Successful People You Didn’t Know Had ADHD

However, hardly half (13%) have actually contacted a mediator, according to US-based specialists who conducted a recent study monitoring the trend.

Less than one in twenty persons in the UK, according to research, genuinely have the illness, which is defined by impulsivity, hyperactivity, and difficulties concentrating.
They said that these numbers sparked worries that there may be undetected health issues causing comparable symptoms.

Related: 10 Highly Successful People You Didn’t Know Were Neurodivergent