The report looks at the way the Office for Budget Responsibility has functioned in this, the first Budget since it was permanently established. It raises concerns about the timetable for the economic forecast, noting: the timetable agreed for this forecast and Budget required all decisions which would impact on the economic forecast to be made at least a fortnight before Budget day. It recommended that the timetable should be revisited to provide more flexibility enabling economic shocks and late political decisions to be accommodated. The Committee looked at the economy, public finances, the plan for growth, taxation and the Office for Budget Responsibility. It continues to press for a full review of the OBR including its powers, remit and relationship to Parliament. Also calling for gradual reform of the tax regime and noting the Government's decision to increase the supplementary rate of corporation tax on the oil and gas industry by 12 percentage points in the Budget - less than a year after promising to provide a stable tax regime in the sector -might weaken the Government's credibility in seeking to establish a stable tax regime. The Committee was pleased with the further reduction in corporation tax announced in the Budget as this was a positive measure aimed at boosting growth. With regard to Enterprise Zones it may have some effect in reviving particular areas, but it was noted that almost all the evidence received is unsure about the extent to which they will contribute to UK growth. It is clear that there is still much to be done on the details of this policy.

Budget 2011 sets out the action the Government will take in three areas: maintaining a strong and stable economy; encouraging growth; and delivering fairness. Chapter 1 outlines how the measures in the Budget advance the Government's long-term goals. Chapter 2 provides a brief description of all Budget policy decisions. The decisions have a neutral impact on the public finances, implementing fiscal consolidation as planned. Growth is forecast to be 1.7 per cent in 2011, but the outlook for the public finances is broadly unchanged. Measures are outlined on: personal tax; corporate taxes; tax measures affecting charities; indirect taxes (tobacco, alcohol, fuel and gambling duties, other transport taxes, landfill, VAT); tax reliefs; anti-avoidance; tax administration and banking. Action to promote growth include (a) creating the most competitive tax system in G20, with reductions in corporation tax, simplification of the tax system, and consultation on integrating the operation of income tax and National Insurance; (b) measures to facilitate and support the starting up of businesses - removal of regulatory burdens, implementing Lord Young's proposals on health and safety, expansion of investment schemes and other financial support, streamlining the planning system, investing in science capital development; (c) encouraging investment and exports through establishing 21 new enterprise zones, extra funding for new rail projects and pothole repair; (d) creation of a more educated, flexible workforce, with additional work experience places and apprenticeships. Fairness is addressed through various tax and pension changes. Appendix A examines the impact on households. A number of supporting documents are published alongside the Budget.

The Environmental Audit Committee claims the Treasury has undermined public trust in green taxes by appearing to use them as a revenue raising tool rather than a serious attempt to change environmentally damaging behaviour. The MPs single out two recent tax changes for particular criticism: cutting a penny off Fuel Duty while providing no new incentives to switch to lower carbon alternatives; and proposed changes to Air Passenger Duty will do nothing to reduce emissions or make it a more effective environmental tax. The Treasury needs to adopt a coherent strategy for environmental taxation, setting out its objectives and rationale, the basis on which rates are set, and how their impact will be evaluated. With green taxes there is a strong case for ring-fencing some of the revenues for investment in green alternatives - for instance using fuel duty to reduce public transport fares - in order to build trust and support for environmental taxes. Environmental taxes need to be straightforward so that taxpayers understand the behavioural change signal being sent. In practice their growing complexity means that many businesses are unaware of the cumulative impact of the environmental taxes affecting them. They must also be seen as fair so that political support can be built for environmental taxation. Also, the Plan for Growth, published alongside the Budget, does not provide the much needed step-change to aid the transition to a low-carbon economy. The Government should demonstrate greater commitment to putting the green economy at the heart of growth plans.

On February 1, 2010, President Obama submitted a budget proposal for FY2011 that requests $58.49 billion for the international affairs budget, a 16% increase over the enacted FY2010 funding level. This report analyzes the FY2011 request, recent-year funding trends, and congressional action related to FY2011 State-Foreign Operations legislation.