[MaxGhenis]

Changes how the live fuel duty post (fuel-duty-cut-extension, merged in #1459) describes and cites the official figure. Max's rule from today: always cite primary sources. Every official comparison now uses the OBR's detailed policy table, Table 1.1, with Budget Table 6.1 as context.

Do not merge without Max's yes. It changes a live post.

What changes

• Figures. The official figure is now Table 1.1's line for the measure: −£574m in 2026-27 and −£782m in 2027-28 (−573.83 and −781.75, its only line, Fuel Duty). Table 6.1's −£575m and −£780m are its rounding, and the post gives them as context under the cost table. The sheet's Fuel Duty head total (−632.00 and −810.58) adds the red diesel measure, so it is not used.
• Certification. Fuel duty is the one Budget measure the OBR did not certify. EFO October 2026, chapter 3, footnote 1: "we could not certify the final version of the relevant costing but have used the Government's estimates in this forecast and will finalise the certification for our next forecast". The post now says so in the key figures and in the comparison appendix, and calls the figure "the government's estimate".
• Wording. "HM Treasury (Table 6.1)" becomes "Government estimate (OBR Table 1.1)". "The Treasury's costing", where it means the figure, becomes "the government's estimate". Mentions of HM Treasury's policy costings document stay as they are.

What doesn't change

PolicyEngine's figures (−£301m and −£521m), the households, the charts and every other section. Apart from the style lines below, the diff is in the fuel duty post only.

Merged with Pavel's #1476 (main merged in at b44f105, no rebase)

• Line 9 conflicted. Cite primary sources in the fuel duty and PTA posts #1476 kept HM Treasury's £575m/£780m and linked the Table 6.1 spreadsheet; this PR's Table 1.1 text replaces that sentence.
• Pavel's Table 6.1 spreadsheet link now sits on the note under the cost table, where this PR names Table 6.1. His policy costings link to AB26_Policy_Costing.pdf (line 16) is unchanged.

Style: "is above" becomes "exceeds" (957cc2a)

Max's style rule; prepositional uses of "above" stay. Style only, no figures changed:

• fuel duty post: "Their income exceeds the Pension Credit guarantee"; "when diesel exceeded £2 a litre";
• PTA post (from Cite primary sources in the fuel duty and PTA posts #1476): "which exceeds September 2026 CPI inflation of 3.5%".

Checked

• The values on policy.xlsx sheet 1.1, measure 3, row 17, as read by the coordinator at Create Supporters page #300 555e7f74. My own earlier read of Table 1.1 agrees: −573.8 and −781.8.
• The footnote's text and location in the EFO (chapter 3, "Policy measures", footnote 1), and the foreword's matching sentence.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated
policyengine-calculator-next	Ready	Preview	Oct 28, 2026 9:10pm UTC
policyengine-website	Ready	Preview	Oct 28, 2026 9:10pm UTC

[MaxGhenis]

Independent review (GPT-6.1 Sol, two rounds): APPROVE at 44bd041.

• Round 1 (at cd0a8f9) checked the figures against OBR policy Table 1.1, sheet 1.1, cells G17:J17: −573.832335 and −781.754076, Fuel Duty receipts only, with no VAT line. Those round to −£574m and −£782m, and to −£575m and −£780m at £5m. It also confirmed chapter 3, footnote 1 of the EFO as the citation for the OBR not certifying the estimate, with the foreword in agreement. It asked for two more sentences to stop crediting the estimate to the Treasury: fiscal years (line 510) and receipts (line 532).
• Round 2 (at 44bd041) found both fixed exactly and nothing new introduced. Every numerical comparison now names the government's estimate. The remaining Treasury mentions are about its policy costings document.

Not for merging without Max's yes: this changes a live post.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[MaxGhenis]

Re-review at 957cc2a (main merged in at b44f105, then the "exceeds" style commit): approve, no findings. Reviewer: an independent Opus 5.5 agent, since the Codex lanes were closed. It reviewed the delta from 44bd041, which Sol approved in round 2.

Merge with #1476 (b44f105)

• Pavel's links are kept. AB26_Policy_Costing.pdf is on line 16. His Table 6.1 spreadsheet link appears once, character for character, on the note under the cost table (line 336), which still says "row 3".
• The only Cite primary sources in the fuel duty and PTA posts #1476 text this PR replaces is line 9's £575m/£780m sentence, now the Table 1.1 text approved at 44bd041.
• Apart from Pavel's two links, the merge changes nothing in the fuel post between 44bd041 and b44f105, so nothing from main is reverted. The PTA edits from PTA post: label the official costing as a total with no benefit savings #1474 and Cite primary sources in the fuel duty and PTA posts #1476 are intact.
• No conflict markers, and the brackets balance on lines 9, 336 and 532. Every figure is credited to "the government". £575m/£780m appears only as Table 6.1's rounding, and the remaining HM Treasury mentions are about its costings document or method.

Style commit (957cc2a)

• This is a wording change only. Fuel post line 516 now reads "Their income exceeds the Pension Credit guarantee", line 518 "when diesel exceeded £2 a litre" (keeping the past tense), and PTA post line 994 "which exceeds September 2026 CPI inflation of 3.5%". No figure, link or meaning changes.
• No "is/are/was/were above" is left in either post. The remaining uses of "above" are prepositional and stay. Line 994 is the only change to pension-tax-allowance.md against main.

Gates at 957cc2a: gh pr checks exits 0 (all 10 pass), and the PR is MERGEABLE. It is blocked only on the required review.

This PR changes a live post, so it waits for Max's go.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[MaxGhenis]

Merging on Max's go ("Pavel's first, then ours"), after #1476 merged. Admin merge at head 957cc2a684a25652e437c3dbc737f9ede5e6abaf, because the only remaining block is the required approving review, which Max can't give on his own PR.

Gates at this head:

• gh pr checks exits 0 (10/10 pass).
• mergeable is MERGEABLE; the PR is not a draft and has no CHANGES_REQUESTED review.

Reviews:

• Sol approved round 2 at 44bd041.
• An independent Opus 5.5 agent approved the delta from 44bd041 to 957cc2a with no findings (Fuel duty post: cite the official figure from OBR Table 1.1, uncertified (and 'exceeds' style fixes) #1475 (comment)).

Content:

• The fuel duty cost table compares with the government's estimate in OBR Table 1.1 (−£574 million and −£782 million). The note under it gives Table 6.1's rounded −£575 million and −£780 million.
• Pavel's Cite primary sources in the fuel duty and PTA posts #1476 links are kept.
• The style commit applies Max's "exceeds" rule with no figure changes (fuel lines 516 and 518, PTA line 994).

🤖 Generated with Claude Code