Business

Thousands of taxpayers chose to spend part of their Christmas break tackling their tax affairs, with more than 4,600 people filing their Self Assessment returns on Christmas Day alone, new figures show.

Data released by HM Revenue and Customs reveals that 37,435 people submitted their returns between Christmas Eve and Boxing Day, suggesting that for a growing number of taxpayers, festive filing is becoming a seasonal habit.

Christmas Eve proved the busiest of the three days, with 22,350 returns filed. The peak hour was between 11am and noon, when 3,159 customers hit submit. On Christmas Day itself, 4,606 people completed their returns, with the busiest hour falling between 1pm and 2pm. Boxing Day saw a further 10,479 returns filed, peaking mid-afternoon.

While many opted to deal with tax rather than turkey, HMRC found attitudes were mixed when it spoke to shoppers at Manchester’s Christmas markets, where most said they would rather focus on festive food than finances.

With just one month to go until the 31 January filing deadline, HMRC is urging those who have yet to complete their return to get started as soon as possible.

Myrtle Lloyd, HMRC’s chief customer officer, said millions of people had already filed and could start the new year with “one less thing to worry about”.

“For anyone yet to file, don’t leave it until the last minute,” she said. “Filing now means you know exactly what you owe and have time to arrange payment.”

Taxpayers who submit their return by 30 December may be able to pay any tax owed through their PAYE tax code, while filing early also gives more time to explore payment plans if needed.

HMRC highlighted the use of its app and online support tools, including step-by-step guidance, webinars and YouTube videos, to help customers complete their returns and pay what they owe. The department also pointed to a new digital PAYE service for the High Income Child Benefit Charge, allowing some claimants to leave Self Assessment altogether and settle the charge through their tax code instead.

HMRC also reminded customers that Winter Fuel Payments received in autumn 2025 do not need to be included on returns for the 2024-25 tax year, as these will be recovered in the following year’s return.

With the deadline fast approaching, the message from HMRC is clear: filing early can reduce stress, provide clarity on liabilities and make the start of 2026 a little easier.

Read more:
Festive filers sleigh their Self Assessment returns as thousands log on over Christmas

The manufacturing trade body Made in Britain has raised concerns over the alleged unauthorised use of a logo closely resembling its own by Reform UK.

In a statement, Made in Britain said it had become aware that Reform UK was using a logo it believes to be “substantially similar” to its registered mark across marketing materials and merchandise. The organisation stressed that no authorisation, licence or consent had been granted for such use.

Made in Britain said it maintains a strictly neutral political stance and does not endorse, support or affiliate with any political party or movement. It added that the use of its logo, or any similar insignia, by political organisations is expressly prohibited under its rules.

The body, which represents and promotes British manufacturers at home and overseas, said its branding exists solely to support its members and advance British commerce. As a result, it does not permit its brand identity to be associated with political campaigns or messaging.

The statement underlines the growing sensitivity around branding, intellectual property and perceived political alignment as political parties increasingly use merchandise and visual identity as part of their campaigning efforts.

Read more:
‘Made in Britain’ body challenges Reform UK over alleged unauthorised logo use

A new government scheme aimed at tackling long-term workplace sickness has been dismissed by business leaders and advisers as woefully inadequate, with critics warning it amounts to “emptying the ocean with a teaspoon”.

The initiative, announced this morning by the Department for Work and Pensions, will fund occupational health training for 5,000 line managers working in small and medium-sized enterprises across England. The free training, delivered by the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, will run between January and March next year and is designed to help managers spot early signs of health-related issues and intervene before employees fall out of work altogether.

Ministers say the scheme will help address what they describe as an inherited crisis, with more than 2.8 million people currently signed off as long-term sick — one of the highest rates in the G7. Government-commissioned analysis has found that around 800,000 more working-age adults are now out of work due to sickness than in 2019.

The financial cost to small businesses is significant. Replacing an employee lost to ill health costs more than £11,000 on average, while each day of sickness absence is estimated to cost firms about £120 in lost profit. The training will focus on equipping line managers to recognise warning signs such as persistent fatigue, changes in behaviour and rising absence levels, and to have more supportive conversations about workplace adjustments.

The Minister for Employment, Dame Diana Johnson, said the scheme would give small businesses tools they often lack. “Too often, small businesses lose skilled staff to health issues without the tools to support them, and that doesn’t help anyone,” she said. “This free training gives line managers the confidence to have the right conversations and make adjustments that could help keep people in work.”

However, experts across data, HR, finance and advisory sectors questioned both the ambition and impact of the programme.

Rohit Parmar-Mistry, founder of Burton-on-Trent-based Pattrn Data, said the numbers simply did not add up. He argued that training 5,000 managers would make little difference to a problem affecting millions. “This feels like outsourcing the problem to already overworked SME managers,” he said, warning that spotting health issues earlier does nothing to fix chronic illness, long NHS waiting lists or wider systemic failures. “A manager can recognise fatigue, but they can’t fix public healthcare or broken work environments.”

Kate Underwood, founder of Kate Underwood HR and Training, said the initiative addressed only part of the problem. While she welcomed efforts to improve managers’ confidence in having difficult conversations, she warned that the real pressure on small firms came from the cost of sickness absence, the complexity of reasonable adjustments and delays in accessing occupational health advice. “Training helps, but it doesn’t remove the financial and legal strain that sinks small teams,” she said.

From a wellbeing perspective, Sarah Gatford, founder of Sarah Gatford Ltd, said the success of the scheme would depend on whether it went beyond compliance. She argued that genuine progress required managers to build trust and psychological safety, not simply follow checklists. “If this helps managers ask ‘How can I help?’ instead of ‘When will you be back?’, it’s a start, but 5,000 managers across the entire SME sector is still a drop in the ocean,” she said.

Others were more blunt. Riz Malik, director of R3 Wealth, described the initiative as disconnected from the real priorities of small businesses. “This probably isn’t on the top 100 list of things SMEs want from government going into 2026,” he said, calling it another example of policymaking divorced from commercial reality.

Scott Gallacher, director at Rowley Turton, said the funding level exposed the gap between political messaging and operational reality. He noted that almost 80% of SMEs provide no occupational health training at all, across an economy with roughly 5.7 million small businesses. “When you break the numbers down, this equates to pennies per person off work,” he said. “That suggests this is more about optics than impact.”

While ministers insist the scheme is a first step towards keeping more people in work, critics argue that without deeper investment in healthcare, workplace flexibility and sustainable job design, the initiative risks becoming another well-intentioned policy that fails to shift the underlying problem.

Read more:
Workplace sickness scheme branded ‘teaspoon solution’ as experts warn government plan lacks scale

Hairdressers and barbers are joining pub landlords in banning Labour MPs from their premises, as anger intensifies across the high street over business rates, rising employment costs and what some owners describe as a “betrayal” by the government.

Signs reading “No Labour MPs” have begun appearing in salon windows and barbershops, echoing a protest that has already seen more than 1,000 pubs bar parliamentarians from Keir Starmer’s party. The move follows widespread frustration with the Budget delivered by Rachel Reeves, which business groups say has piled fresh costs onto already struggling firms.

Salon owners say they feel particularly aggrieved after ministers pledged to support the high street by “levelling the playing field” between bricks-and-mortar businesses and online giants. While Reeves announced a reduction in the business rates multiplier for smaller firms, the discount amounts to just 5p — far short of the 20p cut many businesses had called for — and is being wiped out by rising rateable values.

Collette Osborne, who runs two Hairven salons in Nottinghamshire, said she had displayed a “No Labour MPs” sign after being hit with a business rates increase of more than £10,000 a year. Her local Labour MPs are Juliet Campbell and Michael Payne.

“Small businesses like mine are desperate and hanging on by a thread,” Osborne said. “Rachel Reeves promised she would act to protect high street salons, but the government now seems to have its fingers in its ears. There is no spare capacity to absorb business rate rises on top of higher wages, utilities, finance costs and Covid debt repayments.”

In London, salon owner Emma Vickery said nearly four decades of paying taxes and employing staff were being undermined by mounting costs. “It is becoming financially unsustainable,” she said. “Without urgent support or recognition of the pressures on small employers, businesses like mine will simply disappear.”

The backlash mirrors growing discontent in the hospitality sector, where pub landlords have warned that higher employer national insurance contributions and above-inflation increases in the minimum wage are accelerating closures. Some MPs, including Reeves herself, have reportedly been barred from local pubs as a result.

Toby Dicker, from the Salon Employers’ Association, said many in the sector felt particularly let down by a Labour government that had pledged to “make work pay”.

“These are decent, hard-working people — the backbone of the high street — who expected support, not a heavier tax burden,” he said. “There’s a strong sense of betrayal.”

The Conservatives have seized on the discontent. Andrew Griffith, the party’s business spokesman, said: “This government won’t listen to small businesses, so it’s no wonder salons have joined pubs in banning their Labour MP. Perhaps if ministers feel even a fraction of the misery being inflicted on high streets, things might change.”

A Labour source defended the government’s approach, saying: “The government is backing high street businesses across the country, including hairdressers and salons. That’s why the Chancellor announced a £4.3bn support package at the Budget.”

Despite that reassurance, the spread of protest signs from pubs to salons underlines the depth of anger among small business owners — and the political challenge facing Labour as it seeks to reassure the very high streets it claims to champion.

Read more:
Hairdressers join pub landlords in banning Labour MPs over business rates backlash

The founder of LinkedIn, Reid Hoffman, is among a group of Silicon Valley investors helping to bankroll Labour’s digital push against Reform UK on TikTok, raising fresh questions about the growing role of social media influencers in British politics.

Labour has appointed FourOneOne, a digital marketing agency set up by figures behind the party’s 2024 general election campaign, to provide MPs with social media training and access to influencers. The firm has been tasked with helping Labour politicians sharpen their presence on platforms such as TikTok, which the party increasingly sees as critical to reaching younger voters.

Corporate filings show that FourOneOne has a minority shareholder, Estratos Digital, a Vienna-based digital agency founded by two former Hungarian Socialist politicians. Estratos itself is backed by Higher Ground Labs, a US venture capital fund with close links to the Democratic Party in the United States.

Higher Ground Labs has received funding from a number of prominent tech investors, including Hoffman, Ron Conway, an early backer of Google and PayPal, and Chris Sacca, who has invested in companies such as Twitter, Uber and Instagram. The fund has poured tens of millions of dollars into technology firms designed to support progressive political campaigns.

FourOneOne’s work for Labour has included arranging influencer access to press briefings and high-profile events such as the party conference, in return for social media coverage. The agency also provides one-to-one coaching for more than a dozen Labour MPs and runs wider training sessions across the parliamentary party.

However, the firm has attracted scrutiny following reports that it has offered cash payments to influencers in exchange for posting “progressive” content online. Investigative outlet Declassified UK reported that FourOneOne offered journalist Amun Bains £50 a week to publish at least five videos, with the potential for additional bonuses, including content attacking Reform and promoting Labour-aligned messages.

FourOneOne said the payments were part of its “Amplifiers” project and were not connected to the Labour Party. A Labour spokesperson declined to comment, citing the confidentiality of arrangements with external contractors.

The agency is run by Nik Rutherford, a former music teacher and Labour councillor, and counts Assaf Kaplan, a former Israeli intelligence officer who has worked as a Labour staffer, as one of its directors. Its growing influence comes as Keir Starmer ramps up Labour’s digital presence, including launching his own TikTok account and publishing content on Substack.

Downing Street has also begun hosting briefings and events specifically for online content creators. This week, No 10 confirmed it would scrap its daily afternoon lobby briefings for political journalists, replacing them with regular press conferences open to influencers and digital creators.

Beyond the UK, Estratos has been involved in online political advertising campaigns across Europe, including backing Rafał Trzaskowski’s unsuccessful bid for the Polish presidency earlier this year. Higher Ground Labs, founded in 2017 by a former Obama campaign director, has invested more than $50m in over 65 political and civic technology startups aligned with Democratic causes.

Estratos Digital, FourOneOne and Higher Ground Labs were contacted for comment.

Read more:
Llinkedin founder bankrolls Labour’s TikTok push against reform

The City of London is preparing to channel significantly more capital into defence as rising geopolitical tensions, and the growing threat posed by Vladimir Putin’s Russia, force a rethink of long-held investment priorities.

Almost two-thirds of senior financial services leaders expect spending on Britain’s military capabilities to increase over the next year, according to new research from KPMG. More than a quarter of respondents believe defence investment will rise “much more” in the next 12 months.

The findings mark a sharp pivot for the City after years in which environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing dominated boardroom thinking and defence was often treated as an ethical red line. That position is now rapidly eroding as security concerns move to the centre of economic and financial stability planning.

Karim Haji, global and UK head of financial services at KPMG, said growing geopolitical risks had made it increasingly unrealistic for investors to avoid the defence sector.

“These findings point to a growing recognition that national security, geopolitical alignment and market integrity are now inseparable from the stability of the finance sector,” he said.

The shift comes amid increasingly stark warnings from western leaders. Earlier this month, NATO secretary-general Mark Rutte warned that Russia could be in a position to attack a Nato member state within five years, citing Moscow’s escalating covert and cyber activity across Europe.

“Russia is already escalating its covert campaign against our societies,” Rutte said. “We must be prepared for the scale of war our grandparents or great-grandparents endured.”

Putin has denied plans to wage war against Europe, but said Russia was prepared to act “right now” if it felt threatened.

Against this backdrop, City leaders ranked defence investment as their top strategic priority for the year ahead, ahead of preserving central bank independence in the fight against inflation and improving regulatory cooperation between the UK and the US.

Almost four in 10 respondents said increased spending on national security was essential to safeguarding financial stability in 2026, reflecting concerns that prolonged conflict or escalation could have systemic economic consequences.

The survey also highlighted unease about vulnerabilities elsewhere in the financial system. More than a quarter of executives flagged private credit, often described as “shadow banking”, as a growing risk, with trillions of pounds of lending now held outside traditional, highly regulated banks. A further 22 per cent called for tougher scrutiny of non-bank financial institutions.

Haji said the rapid expansion of private credit markets, combined with their limited transparency, could amplify shocks during periods of extreme stress.

“These markets now sit at the heart of corporate funding, yet they are less tested in a crisis than traditional banks,” he said.

Taken together, the findings underline a fundamental change in how the City views defence, security and risk. What was once seen as incompatible with responsible investment is increasingly being reframed as essential to economic resilience — and investors are positioning accordingly.

Read more:
City set to pour billions into defence as Russia threat reshapes investment priorities

Sir Jim Ratcliffe is once again fighting for survival at Ineos, as the industrial giant grapples with an £18bn debt mountain and an increasingly hostile debt market.

Nervous bondholders have begun dumping Ineos debt at distressed prices amid a deep downturn in the global chemicals industry, opening the door for aggressive Wall Street hedge funds that specialise in exploiting corporate distress. Around £5bn of Ineos borrowings are now trading at levels that suggest investors are pricing in a serious risk of default.

For Ratcliffe, it is an uncomfortably familiar moment. In the wake of the global financial crisis, Ineos came within hours of collapse after breaching debt covenants, surviving only after a brutal restructuring with its lenders that cost hundreds of millions in fees and higher interest payments. The tycoon later described the experience as being at the mercy of “rapacious” creditors.

This time, the stakes are higher. Borrowings across Ineos Group Holdings and Ineos Quattro Holdings — which together represent around two-thirds of the empire — rose by almost £3bn in the past year alone, taking combined debt beyond £18bn. Annual debt servicing costs have surged to £1.8bn, up £600m year-on-year.

Bond markets have reacted swiftly. Large tranches of Ineos debt that were trading above 90 cents on the dollar in October have since slipped into the low 70s and 80s. According to S&P Global Market Intelligence, short sellers have piled into certain Ineos bonds at an unprecedented pace, signalling bets that prices still have further to fall.

Credit ratings agencies have added to the pressure. Moody’s has downgraded Ineos twice since September, citing a sharp deterioration in operating performance. Turnover fell 20 per cent, while pre-tax earnings plunged 55 per cent. The agency warned of “weak debt metrics”, with leverage running at 13.5 times earnings against a backdrop of overcapacity, weak demand and high energy and regulatory costs.

Industry figures say the numbers are stark. One executive described the third-quarter performance as “dreadful”, warning that rising refinancing costs could push the company closer to the edge if markets remain closed.

The slump has drawn the attention of distressed debt specialists, including funds linked to Elliott Management, whose tactics have made it a feared presence in boardrooms. Such investors often seek full repayment through litigation or attempt to engineer debt-for-equity swaps that wrest control from existing owners.

Ratcliffe has blamed Ineos’s predicament on a toxic mix of high European energy costs, global trade disruption and cheap Chinese imports flooding the market. He has been particularly outspoken about Europe’s net zero policies, arguing carbon costs are “killing manufacturing”. In April, Ineos shut Britain’s last oil refinery at Grangemouth, costing 400 jobs, and has since announced plant closures across Germany and the US.

Cost-cutting has followed a familiar Ratcliffe playbook. Operations have been shuttered, hundreds of staff laid off, sponsorships pulled and non-core assets sold. Even the billionaire’s sporting ambitions have been reined in, with Ineos exiting high-profile partnerships and writing off hundreds of millions tied up in its Belstaff acquisition.

Yet cuts alone may not be enough. A flagship new plastics plant under construction in Belgium, Project One, is intended to revitalise European production but will add a further £3bn of debt. Ratcliffe has acknowledged that, with today’s market conditions, the project might never have been approved.

Some advisers warn that completing it risks “throwing good money after bad”. Others argue abandoning it would destroy long-term competitiveness.

Banks are watching closely. Barclays, which once played a pivotal role in rescuing Ineos during the financial crisis, recently warned that Europe’s chemicals groups must prioritise debt reduction or risk becoming “worthless” in the next downturn.

Ineos insists it has learned from the past and says it retains tight control over costs and liquidity. Insiders argue the company is better prepared than it was 15 years ago.

But as bond prices slide and activist creditors circle, the final outcome may no longer rest solely in Ratcliffe’s hands.

Read more:
Ratcliffe battles to keep Ineos afloat as £18bn debt pile draws in vulture funds

A £5 billion tax raid on salary sacrifice pension schemes announced in Rachel Reeves’s Budget has emerged as the single most damaging policy for business confidence, according to new research from the Confederation of British Industry.

Almost three-quarters (73%) of companies surveyed by the CBI said the move to levy national insurance contributions on pension salary sacrifice above a new cap was the most harmful measure in the Budget, warning it risks deterring workers from saving for retirement and disproportionately hitting middle earners.

The survey of more than 100 businesses and trade bodies found the mood across the corporate sector remains bleak following the Chancellor’s fiscal package. Some 84% of respondents said the Budget would not help lower the cost of doing business, while 62% said it would fail to boost confidence to innovate or invest for growth.

Business leaders are particularly concerned about the cumulative impact of policy changes, including higher business rates, above-inflation increases to the minimum wage, and rising employer national insurance costs. Together, they argue, these measures are squeezing margins at a time when firms are already grappling with weak demand and economic uncertainty.

Under the current system, salary sacrifice arrangements allow employees to reduce their taxable income by paying pension contributions directly from their salary, lowering both income tax and national insurance. Employers also benefit by paying national insurance only on the reduced salary, often enabling them to offer more generous pension contributions.

From 2029, however, the Chancellor’s reforms will cap salary sacrifice pension contributions at £2,000 a year. Any contributions above that level will attract employee national insurance at 8% on earnings below £50,268 and 2% above that threshold, while employers will pay full employer NICs at 15%.

The Treasury estimates the measure will raise £4.8 billion in its first year. Its own impact assessment suggests that around 3.3 million people currently sacrifice more than £2,000 a year into their pensions and will therefore face higher national insurance bills.

Businesses warn that the additional cost burden will inevitably feed through into lower employer pension contributions. The CBI has previously calculated that even a modest reduction in employer contributions could significantly erode retirement savings over time. A 22-year-old man on median earnings, contributing 9% of pay into a pension, could see his retirement pot shrink by nearly £25,000 if employer contributions were cut by just one percentage point.

Respondents to the CBI survey were blunt in their assessments. A professional services firm described the cap as an indirect tax on pensions, while a London-based service company said it would affect a “huge number of middle earners”. A construction business in the North of England warned the policy would almost certainly force firms to scale back employer pension contributions.

Louise Hellem, chief economist at the CBI, said the policy risks storing up long-term problems for both households and the public finances. “People are already saving far too little for retirement,” she said. “While this may boost Treasury revenues in the short term, it risks leaving future governments with retirees less able to fund a comfortable lifestyle or their own care.”

She added that, combined with higher national insurance and wage costs, the measure further penalises employment and reduces firms’ capacity to invest. “At a time when we need economy-wide growth to pick up, this is another headwind holding businesses back.”

Read more:
Budget tax raid on salary sacrifice schemes rattles business confidence

There’s a particular sound that stays with you once you’ve lived in the English countryside. Not birdsong, that’s too obvious, but the deeper rhythm of things: the tractor coughing into life at dawn, Chameau boots crunching on gravel, the hooves of the horses going out for a hack, the soft murmur of a village pub where everyone knows exactly why you’re there even if they’ve never seen you before.

I had a house in rural Northamptonshire once. Not a fantasy “weekend retreat”, but a place where life actually happened. One evening, over a pint of ‘landlord’ and slightly judgemental, the village gamekeeper offered to teach me how to shoot. “You get good enough,” he said, “and maybe you can join us on a day at the estate.”

A few sessions at the clays with a beautiful Purdey side-by-side and I was hooked, not just on hitting the target – which I am told my hit rate was very impressive – but on the world around it. The quiet discipline. The sense of responsibility. The unspoken understanding that this was not about bloodlust or bravado, but stewardship. About knowing the land, respecting it, and earning your place within it.

Which is why, as 2025 limps to a close, I find myself deeply uneasy about the future of Britain’s rural economy, and the way of life bound up in it.

We’ve been told, repeatedly, that concerns about farming, shooting, gamekeeping and rural business are either nostalgic indulgences or political dog whistles. Watch a few episodes of Clarkson’s Farm and tell me that again with a straight face. Strip away the jokes and celebrity sheen and what you’re left with is a documentary about a sector living permanently on the brink,  one failed harvest, one policy tweak, one cost spike away from collapse.

That brinkmanship became painfully clear this year when the government set its sights on agricultural inheritance tax relief. What began as a plan to end long-standing protections for family farms triggered outrage across rural Britain. As reported by the Financial Times, the subsequent retreat, raising thresholds and softening the blow, was presented as a compromise. But uncertainty, once introduced, doesn’t politely leave again. It lingers. It freezes investment. It accelerates exits.

Family farms are not tax shelters. They are capital-intensive, low-margin, generational businesses whose value is tied up in land rather than liquidity. Treating them like dormant wealth piles rather than working enterprises is how you dismantle a sector quietly, without ever admitting you meant to.

And it’s not just farmers feeling the squeeze. Gamekeeping, shooting and countryside management support tens of thousands of jobs and underpin rural tourism, hospitality and supply chains. A stark warning was sounded recently in The Telegraph’s analysis of the decline of gamekeeping, which laid bare how rising costs, regulation and political hostility are pushing skilled rural workers out altogether.

This isn’t culture war fluff. It’s economics.

Add to that the sense, increasingly hard to shake, that rural Britain is culturally misunderstood by those writing policy. Labour’s proposals around animal welfare and trail hunting have reignited fears that legislation is being shaped through an urban moral lens, with The Guardian reporting warnings from countryside groups that rural voices are being marginalised rather than engaged.

Meanwhile, the data tells its own grim story. Farm closures continue to outpace new starts, with thousands of holdings disappearing under the weight of rising costs, labour shortages and unpredictable returns, as highlighted by FarmingUK. When a farm goes, it rarely goes alone. The contractor loses work. The feed supplier closes. The pub shortens its hours. The village hollows out.

What worries me most is that this erosion is happening quietly, politely, without the drama that usually forces political reckoning. There’s no single villain. No obvious cliff edge. Just a steady draining away of viability until one day we look around and wonder where everyone went.

The countryside isn’t a theme park or a television backdrop. It’s an economic ecosystem that feeds us, employs us and anchors communities. Once it’s gone, you don’t rebuild it with grants and slogans.

I learnt to shoot because a gamekeeper trusted me with his craft. That trust, between land and people, tradition and modernity, economy and culture, is what’s really under threat. If policymakers keep treating rural Britain as a sentimental inconvenience rather than a strategic asset, they may wake up one day to find the countryside still looks beautiful… but no longer works. And that, unlike a missed clay, is a mistake you don’t get to take another shot at.

Read more:
I worry for our rural economy – and yes, it’s personal

Hospitals across England are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence to ease pressure on accident and emergency departments, as a new AI-powered forecasting tool is deployed to help predict when demand will be at its highest.

The system, now in use across 50 NHS organisations and available to all trusts, is designed to identify likely surges in A&E attendances days and weeks in advance. By analysing a wide range of data, from historical hospital admissions and seasonal illness trends to Met Office temperature forecasts and day-of-week patterns, the tool helps managers plan staffing levels, bed capacity and resources more effectively.

Ministers say the technology will enable patients to be seen and treated more quickly during peak periods, while reducing last-minute pressure on frontline staff. The rollout comes as emergency departments face heightened winter demand, driven by record flu cases, cold weather injuries and seasonal illness. More than 18 million flu vaccines have already been delivered this autumn, with the AI system continuing to learn from evolving seasonal health data.

For NHS staff, the forecasting tool offers clearer long-term planning and earlier warnings of potential bottlenecks, helping trusts put the right people in the right place before pressures escalate. For patients, the aim is shorter waits and smoother journeys through emergency care during the busiest times of year.

The initiative forms part of the Prime Minister’s AI Exemplars programme, which is applying artificial intelligence across public services, including health, education, justice, tax and planning, to modernise systems and improve outcomes.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said AI was already transforming healthcare and that demand forecasting marked the next step in that journey. She said the tool would help hospitals predict pressure points, get patients treated faster and support NHS staff during the most challenging months of the year.

Health Innovation Minister Dr Zubir Ahmed said the technology would help hospitals manage winter pressures more effectively, particularly as flu cases rise. He described the rollout as part of a broader ambition to move the NHS from analogue systems to a digital future under the government’s 10-year health plan.

Early feedback from NHS managers has been positive, with local leaders reporting improved decision-making around staffing and capacity. Integrated care boards in areas including Coventry and Warwickshire, and Bedfordshire, Luton and Milton Keynes, are already using the tool to support operational planning.

The forecasting system is one of several AI initiatives being rolled out under the Exemplars programme. Other projects include AI-assisted diagnostics to help clinicians identify conditions such as lung cancer more quickly, automated discharge summaries to speed up patient flow from wards, and the GOV.UK chatbot, which provides instant, plain-English answers to public queries using official government information.

Ministers say the growing use of AI in healthcare is central to building an NHS that is more resilient, efficient and capable of meeting rising demand — particularly during winter — while improving both patient experience and staff wellbeing.

Read more:
AI helps hospitals tackle A&E bottlenecks as NHS rolls out demand-forecasting technology