“REVERSE Robin Hood” Chancellor George Osborne claimed yesterday that deep cuts hitting Britain’s poorest are merely a scratch in public spending.

Mr Osborne braced Britain for more bad news in Wednesday’s Budget in an appearance on the BBC’s Andrew Marr show, claiming: “We need to act now so we don’t pay later.”

He said cuts equivalent to 50p in every £100 spent by the government were needed and claimed it was “not a huge amount in the scheme of things.”

But the Chancellor faced a barrage of criticism for planning new cuts while pressing ahead with a tax giveaway to higher earners.

The Resolution Foundation found his plan to increase the 40p tax threshold from £42,000 to £50,000 would cost £2 billion and be a “windfall” for the richest households.

Yet Mr Osborne was in no mood to compromise over cuts to personal independence payments (PIP), which will affect 640,000 disabled people over the next five years.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell said it showed Mr Osborne was a “reverse Robin Hood” making the poor pay for his mistakes.

“With his recovery built on sand he is looking to slash support for those with disabilities to cover his reckless tax-cut promises that will benefit the richest most,” he added.

SNP MSP Kevin Stewart urged the Chancellor to “listen to the growing consensus in favour of making the necessary public investment to achieve inclusive growth and abandon his tax cuts for the rich.”

Separate research by Labour and housing charities showed that homeless has soared to 250,000 — up 75,000 since the Tories took power in 2010.

That is far higher than official statistics that only include a small proportion of homelessness cases.

And it finds that on current trends the real number of people made homeless will reach 369,000 by the next election in 2020.

Labour say the increase can be traced directly to 13 cuts worth £5 billion to housing benefit — including the bedroom tax — made by Mr Osborne in previous Budgets.

Shadow housing minister John Healey said the figures “hide personal stories of hurt and hopelessness” and should “shock” the Chancellor into action.