Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, held meetings in London last week with senior government figures, including the Prime Minister, the Chancellor and Treasury advisers. The talks follow earlier direct exchanges between Dimon and ministers and come three weeks before the Chancellor delivers the Autumn Budget on October 28.

The visit has drawn attention because of mounting speculation that the Treasury could raise taxes on banks as part of a wider effort to close a gap in the public finances. Officials have been under pressure to find new sources of revenue after economic disruption linked to regional conflicts abroad added further strain to an already stretched budget.

The current stance marks a possible departure from the position taken by previous Treasury leadership, which had described financial services as one of the most valuable sectors in the economy and resisted calls to impose additional levies on banks. That reluctance is now being tested. Officials have not ruled out changes to the bank surcharge or related taxes, and speculation has grown in recent weeks that some form of increase is under active consideration.

Banking executives have used recent meetings to set out their objections. Their argument centres on the risk that higher taxes could push financial institutions to shift operations, staff or investment away from London. Senior figures from Citigroup have made similar points in separate discussions with officials, warning that further tax increases would leave the UK at a disadvantage against rival financial centres such as Frankfurt and Paris, both of which have sought to attract business from the City since Brexit.

Executives are careful to frame their warnings in terms of competitiveness rather than outright opposition to taxation. Their central claim is that the sector already contributes a substantial share of corporation tax and that further increases would do more harm than good to growth prospects the government has said it wants to protect.

Pressure to tax the sector more heavily has come from a different direction. The Trades Union Congress has called for the government to reverse previous reductions to the bank surcharge, arguing that doing so could raise around £9 billion over four years. The TUC has proposed that this revenue be used to help subsidise household energy costs, which have remained a significant burden for many families.

The Green Party has gone further, proposing a windfall tax of 38 per cent on banking profits. The party has suggested this could be used to fund tax reductions for small businesses, arguing that large financial institutions are better placed to absorb higher tax bills than smaller firms struggling with existing costs.

These proposals have added to the pressure on the Chancellor as the Budget approaches. Speaking in recent weeks, the Chancellor has repeated that supporting economic growth in regions outside London remains a central aim of government policy. At the same time, the Chancellor has stressed that fiscal discipline and balanced public spending are non-negotiable elements of the Budget, given the scale of the deficit facing the Treasury.

The tension between these two positions, encouraging growth in the financial sector while also seeking new revenue from it, is likely to shape much of the debate over the coming weeks. Bank executives are expected to continue lobbying ministers directly in the period before the Budget, while trade unions and campaign groups push for a different outcome.

No final decisions have been announced, and Treasury officials have declined to comment on specific proposals under consideration. The outcome will not be confirmed until the Chancellor stands up in the Commons on October 28, when the full scope of tax changes affecting the banking sector is expected to become clear.

‍