Mapped: Areas most likely to benefit as Burnham eyes income tax overhaul
Metro mayors across England could gain greater control over local spending under plans reportedly being considered by Prime Minister Andy Burnham to share income tax receipts more widely, marking a significant step in his devolution agenda. However, experts have warned the policy risks deepening a "postcode lottery" if not carefully designed, since around half of England's population lives outside areas with an elected mayor and would therefore miss out on any benefits.
Burnham, the former Manchester mayor, is expected to set out plans this week to give England's 14 metro mayors greater spending powers as part of his pledge for "good growth in every postcode". Areas without a mayor, such as Cornwall, could face pressure to accept devolution deals despite past opposition, with Labour MP Perran Moon warning of "building fear" within the party that non-mayoral regions will be disadvantaged, as already seen with the 2025 £1.5bn local growth fund. A King's College London and Harvard Kennedy School report, co-authored by Ed Balls, cautioned that devolution must come with genuine redistribution to avoid widening regional disparities, while the government said non-mayoral areas would get "foundation strategic authorities" and greater business rate retention instead.
In short
- Burnham considers sharing income tax receipts with metro mayors
- Areas without mayors, like Cornwall, risk losing out
- Experts warn devolution needs redistribution to avoid a "postcode lottery"
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The case for giving metro mayors control over income tax receipts emphasises that devolution brings decision-making closer to the communities affected, allowing elected local leaders who understand their regions' specific needs to shape spending priorities. This approach respects local democratic accountability and can unlock economic potential through tailored policies, whilst the government's alternative support for non-mayoral areas through foundation strategic authorities and business rate retention provides a differentiated path suited to different regional governance structures.
The case against
The concern that this policy could deepen a postcode lottery rests on the legitimate worry that around half of England's population would miss out on mayoral control over income tax receipts, whilst expert analysis suggests genuine redistribution must accompany devolution to avoid widening regional disparities. Areas without mayors, which have historically resisted devolution deals, risk being further disadvantaged relative to mayoral regions, and alternative mechanisms such as foundation strategic authorities may prove inadequate substitutes for the direct spending control offered to metro areas.
Explained simply
Prime Minister Andy Burnham is proposing to give England's 14 elected metro mayors greater control over their local finances by letting them receive and spend a share of income tax receipts. This is part of his broader agenda to devolve more power and decision-making from central government to regional leaders, under the banner of achieving growth across all parts of England.
However, a significant challenge is that these metro mayors govern areas where only about half of England's population lives. The other half, living in regions without an elected mayor such as Cornwall, would not automatically benefit from the new spending powers. This creates what experts call a "postcode lottery" – where residents' access to investment and opportunities depends on where they happen to live.
The risk of unequal treatment matters because it could widen the gap between prosperous and struggling regions. A report from King's College London and Harvard Kennedy School warned that without careful redistribution, devolution could deepen regional disparities. The government has said it will offer non-mayoral areas alternative arrangements, including greater control over business rates, though it remains unclear whether these will deliver equivalent benefits.