Working people will not see higher taxes “on their payslips”, a minister has said, as he acknowledged disappointment the Government refused to reveal who would be hit by bigger taxes ahead of the Budget.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson repeated warnings that Wednesday’s financial report would involve “difficult choices” but insisted it was a choice for England between investment or decline.

But the Cabinet minister refused to say whether the £13,000-a-year small business owner was a “working person” who should be protected from tax increases in Rachel Reeves’ first budget.

In a confrontation with broadcasters on Sunday morning, Ms Phillipson was repeatedly pressed to define her use of the term “working people”, which the Labor Government has promised to protect from tax rises in the budget.

“You’re inviting me to speculate about the nature of the question you’re asking,” he told the BBC’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme.

“What I’m saying is, when people look at their pay stubs, they’re not going to see higher taxes.”

Speculation has increased that people making money from assets such as property could face bigger taxes in the Budget after Sir Keir Starmer said they did not meet the definition of “working people”.

In its manifesto, the Labor Party had promised not to increase taxes on what it defined as “working people”; He openly rejected increases in VAT, national insurance and income tax.

However, the Chancellor is expected to increase employers’ national insurance contributions by at least one per cent in the budget; This can especially negatively impact small businesses.

Asked whether a small business owner making a net profit of around £13,000 would be considered an employed person, Ms Phillipson said: “We can talk about a number of different assumptions about who may or may not be caught by tax measures. “It may or may not be in the budget.

“When Rachel sits here next weekend, you can ask her about the measures she announced.

“I know it’s frustrating that I can talk about some areas ahead of the budget, but not all. I appreciate your disappointment.

“I would like to come and say ‘here are all the measures line by line’, but that’s not my job, that’s the Chancellor’s job.”

Ministers also ruled out continuing the freeze on income tax thresholds introduced by the previous government, where people were driven to pay higher rates due to a phenomenon known as “fiscal drift”.

Ms Reeves last year described such freezes as “picking into workers’ pockets” while the Conservatives pursued the policy, prompting accusations of Tory hypocrisy over Labor’s potential extension.

Disputing the claim that working people would not face a greater burden “on their payslips” given the possibility of thresholds remaining frozen, Ms Phillipson told Times Radio: “I’m not prepared to speculate on assumptions.”

Although ministers remain tight-lipped, Wednesday’s announcement is expected to include a range of measures, including a cut in the earnings threshold at which employers pay national insurance contributions.

That figure is expected to rise by around £20bn, along with an increase in employer contributions, as Ms Reeves seeks to revitalize public services and put the economy on a firmer footing.

Nearly £1.4bn has been announced to rebuild demolished schools, a tripling of investment in free breakfast clubs, £1.8bn to expand Government-funded childcare services and £44m to support kinship and foster carers.

Speaking on Sunday, the Education Secretary said he “wants to move faster” on strengthening protections for vulnerable children but said it “will take time”.

“We have seen a steady erosion of family support services,” he said.

“But it will take time and I would love to move faster on some issues, I definitely would. But there’s only so much we can do right now.”

The cabinet minister also refused to guarantee nurseries would be protected against employer national insurance increases, saying he was committed to improving early years only.

“They can be confident that I am working with them to deliver an excellent early years and childcare system,” he told Times Radio.

Ms Reeves is also expected to target public sector net financial liabilities (PSNFL) as the new debt measure, rather than the current benchmark of underlying public sector net debt.

The move to PSNFL would give it more leeway in meeting its debt reduction target because it includes a broader mix of government assets and liabilities, including expected student loan repayments, particularly to offset some of the liabilities.

According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, if PSNFL had been used as the measure in the March 2024 budget, the “earnings margin” – the margin at which the fiscal rule is met – would have increased by £53bn.

Capital gains tax, inheritance tax and fuel tax are among other tools Ms Reeves could potentially use to raise revenue as she tries to put the economy on a firmer footing.

In an interview with the Observer he suggested he wanted Wednesday to match the most important moments in Labor’s economic history, while in a column for the Sun On Sunday he said it would be “a Budget for Strugglers”.

He added: “We rebuilt after the war in 1945; We rebuilt in 1964 with the ‘white heat of technology’; We rebuilt our public services in 1997. “We need to do all of this now.”

Shadow science secretary Andrew Griffith said Labor was “essentially lying to the British people” about its plans and compared the party’s behavior to “the worst dodgy car hire firm”.

“Already 110 days later, I think people see that this Government has come in with a false pretense that things will be easy,” he said.

“They are essentially lying to the British people about their plans not to increase national insurance… not to change fiscal rules.”

Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, warned that some public services could remain under pressure despite “one of the biggest ever tax rise budgets”.

He told Sky News: “Justice, local government, social care, police, prisons, they’re all really struggling at the moment.

“So again we’re in this really difficult situation where we could have the largest tax-increase budget or one of the largest tax-increase budgets, but still a lot of public services still feel stuck.”

Mervyn King, the former governor of the Bank of England, warned that high borrowing would also impact long-term interest rates, which would “bear the brunt of it”.

Lord King added: “Of course if you borrow more, it doesn’t matter how you dress it up under a different fiscal rule, people know that higher borrowing means higher borrowing, and the financial markets and the people who lend to the Government know that they will demand the higher amounts they are asked to finance.” a slightly higher interest rate to offset the debt.”