 WHEN GEORGE Osborne sits down at the despatch box just after 1pm on Wednesday lunchtime after delivering his second Budget, the eyes of the business world will not be on him. Nor will they be on the age-old red case from which his speech sprang forth, nor even on Ed Balls as he delivers his riposte.  No, all eyes will be on the "Red Book", the 100-page-plus budget document published in print and online by the Treasury the moment the Chancellor sits down. It was that document for example, which, at last October's spending review, revealed details of the ?1bn green "stealth" tax in spite of Osborne making no mention of it in his speech. and it was also in that document two years earlier that alistair Darling hid a ?250m tax evasion push that again did not figure in the then-Chancellor's speech.  as ever with the annual take on the state of the nation's finances, the devil will be in the detail. It will be that detail which will really explain how much pain or gain will be meted out to the business world.  Osborne has said he wants this Budget to be one about "reform" rather that "rescue". He wants to make it a "Budget for growth", mapping out how the Government will support the private sector and create the employment and the profits needed for a healthy economy.  Business will be watching warily - will any of their demands have been listened to? Will Osborne get it right?  One of the big-ticket items from business is a call for tax reform. Osborne is known to be looking at whether it is possible to bring together income tax and national insurance, although Treasury sources said the issue was "very complicated" and any fundamental changes will probably only be achieved over a series of Budgets.  Treasury officials also say that the Chancellor wants to see a much simpler tax system with more generous allowances and fewer exemptions. The reform of VaT, condemned by the OECD as one of the most inefficient taxes in the UK because of its myriad of exemptions and low rates, will be left for another time.  The Institute of Directors has demanded a commitment to abolishing the 50pc top rate of tax by the end of the current parliament and an extension of the reduction of corporation tax to 15pc by 2020.  The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) has called for an end to over-bureaucratic government red tape, calling over-regulation "one of the most burdensome and complex issues" for the sector.  "It's what would business like and then what they might expect [which is important]," explains Ruth Lea, economic advisor to arbuthnot and the former director of the Centre for Policy Studies.  "Business would like the 50pc tax rate to go but that's a political no-no, even though it arguably doesn't bring in that much revenue." Ms Lea, who will watch the Budget with fellow members of the TaxPayers' alliance, believes that the startling reality of Budget 2011 is that "whatever we would like to see by way of tax cuts is simply not affordable".  "What George Osborne has to try and do is find things that stimulate growth that don't actually cost anything," she argues, pointing to the sizeable government deficit.  Lea, who firmly believes that the vast swathes of red tape should be cut, does not think it will be in spite of some likely "tinkering" from the newly formed Office of Tax Simplification, led by Michael Jack and John Whiting.  Lea argues that Osborne's room for manoeuvre is limited, given a lack of funds, the preponderance of European Union directives that the Government cannot unilaterally repeal and the need to placate the Conservatives' coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats.  "His hands are tied," she said. "No doubt George will do his best to make his rather paltry collection of policies seem rather substantial, but I'm afraid expectations are low."  To date, the Chancellor has said he will present his measures as a "Budget for growth", but by necessity, there will be no giveaways. The Chancellor has relatively little wiggle room to either cut taxes or increase spending dramatically as he has pledged to "stick to the course" and deliver ?111bn of austerity measures over the next four years.  What he is expected to do, however, is deliver a framework for growth - of competitive and simpler taxes, reduced regulation and compelling reasons for businesses to invest, all spelled out in the Growth Review to be published alongside the Budget.  Planning, as Lea points out, is expected to be reformed, unleashing a potential housebuilding boom that will not only stimulate growth and jobs but provide much-needed social housing and increase the built stock sufficiently to take some of the froth out of future house price rises.  Carbon taxes will be simplified, research and development tax credits enhanced and the controlled foreign companies regime will finally be made workable - all of which should help encourage businesses to invest in the UK.  The over-arching feeling among the business community is that the Chancellor has little option but to embrace the private sector. "Britain became in many ways the most indebted and unbalanced major economy in the world. In short, the debt-fuelled model of growth pursued in Britain over the last decade is fundamentally broken," the Chancellor himself admitted last week.  It is an analysis backed by the statistics. Between 2000 and 2005, public sector employment rose by around 12pc compared with just 3pc for private sector employment - financed by a wave of spending that transformed a ?15.9bn budget surplus into a ?38bn budget deficit.  Osborne and his supporters want to rebuild Britain on firmer foundations, with stronger export and business sectors. In the short-term, growth will be subsequently slower than expected, but as angel Gurria, secretary general of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), argued: "Rewards will come when you can sustain higher growth without putting the economy in danger."  Growth could be slowed by changes to monetary policy - namely an increase in interest rates - as well as by a slowdown in the rate of exports. The UK has enjoyed a 20pc depreciation in sterling and yet "export recovery is weak compared to both other OECD countries and previous recessions", the OECD has cautioned.  There will be both good and bad news on the public finances, too. The Government is expected to have borrowed about ?5bn less than forecast for 2010/2011, giving it ?5bn of extra headroom. Osborne is expected to bank it, rather than lavish the electorate with tax cuts. and with good reason.  The official forecasts for growth in 2011 of 2.1pc will almost certainly be revised down, with most economists in the 1.5pc-1.8pc bracket. Unemployment is also expected to rise above the official 8pc forecast. Ray Barrell, of the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR), believes it will be 8.8pc.  The combination of lower growth and higher unemployment will mean the Government will have to borrow more in 2011/2012 than it hoped. Having a little extra in the bank at the start of the year will help. For Osborne, whose "Budget for growth" will start with a growth downgrade, it will be uncomfortable. He will stress he's laying the foundations for growth.  Beyond the economic debate, however, will be a debate on how Osborne's decisions effect real businesses. In the Square Mile, hopes are almost zero that there will be any major changes to the banking levy, which is projected to bring in ?2.5bn to prop up Treasury coffers.  The manufacturing sector - whose output grew by 1.1pc in the last quarter of last year at a time the whole economy fell by 0.6pc - will be looking for a boost, whether financially or verbally, that the sector is key to the Government's future economic plans.  The Chancellor should "lay out the intention to have a formal industrial strategy so that manufacturing can begin to forge a closer working relationship with government", argues Howard Wheeldon, senior strategist at BGC Partners, who hopes such a strategy would help the UK to repeat some of Germany's manufacturing success.  To do so, Wheeldon argues Osborne should attempt to craft a strategy which allows manufacturing to grow from its current 13pc of gross domestic product (GDP) to 25pc within 15 years. Such a strategy would also provide a considerable boost to private sector employment, a key area of the focus for business in the Budget, as employers attempt to work out quite how they will be able to mop up the tens of thousands of civil servants displaced as a result of the Government's public sector spending cuts.  Other help for manufacturing and industry could come from tweaks to the export credit guarantee system to allow small and medium-sized companies to take advantage of tax breaks when exporting overseas.  One demand from the manufacturing sector is for the UK to reconsider its energy policy, particularly the push to renewables, which one senior manufacturing source told The Sunday Telegraph is "highly damaging". "Wind power and the like is something this country cannot afford," said the businessman, adding that a wholesale "rethink" of how energy works alongside industry is needed.  Investment is another area - and the need to attract funds - in which business is hopeful of change. Sir Nigel Rudd, better known as chairman of Baa, spoke out on behalf of entrepreneurial investment.  as chairman of Longbow Capital, a healthcare investment business co-run by his son Edward, he has personally urged the Chancellor to support British innovation.  Calling for simplification of tax relief for venture capital trusts and the need to make business property relief available to such trusts, Sir Nigel is not shy in demanding what he wants.  "Strong British business will be the catalyst for the UK pulling away from recession and into consistent, durable growth," he says. The Budget "provides a clear opportunity for the Government to get behind British business and encourage innovation".  One way in which smaller investors and small companies might be helped is through a focus on the regions, areas that will be adversely hit by the public sector job cuts.  "The regional development authorities had a role to prepare proper strategies for their economies, and there is a worry this focus won't be there in what they will be replaced by," argues Vicky Pryce, former director general, economics, at the Department for Business Innovation and Skills.  "Business will be worried about the regional focus, is it right and is there enough money for the regions?" continues Pryce, now senior managing director at FTI Consulting. "The issue for bigger companies is the links between public and private sector investment - construction, schools etc - and whether there might be some positives here in areas where the Government has retreated a bit on its earlier staunch plans."  Pryce is also "looking for something on capital allowances", which businesses can use to increase capital expenditure, providing reinvestment into the economy.  "Investment depends quite significantly on that. If there was a bit of money available, then the Chancellor may be able to find something in terms of that."  In the end, most commentators and business people agree, this Budget could offer considerably less than has been the case in previous announcements.  "The major decisions of this Parliament were made in the emergency Budget last June and the spending review in October," concludes Lea.  "Osborne's vamped this up as a Budget for growth. But I don't think he's going to be anywhere near as robust and radical enough to really put growth back at the heart of the UK economy."  WHaT BUSINESS WOULD LIKE TO SEE FROM THE BUDGET: FIVE COMPaNY CHIEFS GIVE THEIR VIEWS  LaURa TENISON  MaNaGING DIRECTOR, JOJO MaMaN B?B?  What we need more than anything from this budget is a move to help the private sector create these new jobs we're theoretically going to create. The single most practical way is to give us a tax incentive which means we can roll over corporation tax into job creation.  What I'd be looking for is some system of having a corporation tax rebate if it was being invested in capital expenditure directly linked to jobs. Put simply: tax cuts for job creation. This system of "cash for jobs" has been there for years via Regional Selective assistance grants and can be cost effectively audited.  Rather than putting private sector money into the Chancellor's pocket let's use it to create jobs. We create 100 good quality, long-term jobs a year, but with a rebate we could probably increase that number by 50pc and possibly even double it.  My second plea would be further encouragement and material help for start-ups. There has been talk about cutbacks to regional development authorities (RDas) and this must be redressed. I also think the point of these RDas must be clarified and I'd like to see more low budget yet practical workshops for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). It would be a huge advantage for growing businesses to have access to subsidised accountants, lawyers, marketers and business analysts.  I'd love to see a tax incentive to encourage more employees on to public transport. at JoJo, we are very pro the Government bike scheme - allowing staff to buy bikes tax-free. It would be a huge help to our teams if we could offer them interest-free season tickets.  aLISTaIR COX  CHIEF EXECUTIVE, HaYS  I'd like the Chancellor to put in place real incentives to encourage SMEs to invest in their businesses and create more jobs. Businesses, particularly SMEs, have struggled under a creeping increase in regulation that has made it more onerous and expensive to employ people.  There are currently 4.8m SMEs in the UK and they account for 60pc of all private sector jobs. Historically, they have been the engine of job creation so it is important that support is given to these businesses. One such incentive would be to extend the NICs holiday scheme to more SMEs or to scrap employers' NIC entirely for employers with less than 50 staff.  I want the Chancellor to make it easier for businesses to hire new employees. Since 2007, more than 50 employment regulations have been introduced. It's time to roll back some of this legislation - not introducing more laws that will hit the fragile jobs recovery. For example, we need to look carefully at all areas of the imminent agency Workers Regulation, as this will certainly create more onerous administration for employers.  The UK has the highest youth unemployment since records began in 1992 with nearly 1m young people not in employment, education or training. The Government needs to urgently look at ways to get them into work and equip them with skills so they may contribute to the economy and society. More needs to be done to encourage businesses to take apprentices, such as subsidies or NI holidays.  It will also create internships where there are skills shortages.  KaTHERINE GaRRETT-COX CHIEF  EXECUTIVE, aLLIaNCE TRUST  There is an urgent need to get the country producing again. The Chancellor should look at all the Government-imposed costs of doing business both in terms of its impact on unemployment and the balance of payments.  The costs of regulatory compliance and indirect taxes are inflationary and act as a disincentive to produce. Where subsidies are available, efforts should be made to ensure that they are targeted at industries that need developmental support and that they are not aimed just at sustaining the unsustainable.  Such reductions in disposable income, before inflation, act as a disincentive to save, which will only act to create a dependency culture which increases the burden on the state. as much as we need to get the country working, we also need to ensure that people are more self-sufficient in the provision of their retirement. Increasing the incentive to save, by, say, significantly increasing the annual ISa limit, would be a start.  In addition, according to research conducted by our own economics desk, CPI understates the inflation suffered by all sections of the population. It would be of great benefit if this anomaly was rectified.  The Chancellor should level the playing field on Child Benefit. a family with two earners on ?40,000 each per annum qualifies for Child Benefit, while a family with a single earner on ?45,000 does not. Gross income is assessed for family tax credit and for means-tested loans for university students, so why not for Child Benefit?  aDaM CROZIER  CHIEF EXECUTIVE, ITV  The UK's creative sector can be an engine for growth, but needs to be able to compete fairly in today's global media environment. a Budget for growth should recognise the importance of investment in original UK content and create the right incentives for it to happen - not least by ensuring regulation keeps pace with the changing market place.  Creating a level playing field in the creative industries means removing regulations that grew in the UK during the analogue era, when choice was limited for consumers and advertisers. Today, the digital marketplace is global, very competitive and people are watching more TV content on multiple platforms. Revenues are spread more thinly, and without deregulation, investment in UK creative content will continue to decline.  The competition regime needs to be reformed to recognise the public interest in creating great content for UK viewers and exporting it globally. The UK needs creative enterprises of sufficient scale to invest and compete internationally.  Convergence and globalisation make traditional definitions of markets irrelevant and the UK needs to move towards a more dynamic competition regime for the media that encourages growth and innovation rather than stifling it. It's also important that copyright protection, which rewards innovative content creation and promotes investment, is maintained and enforced.  The Government should also implement the provisions of the Digital Economy act that help tackle infringement and ensure the results of the Intellectual Property review recognise the value of copyright in stimulating innovation.  aNDREW MOSS  CHIEF EXECUTIVE, aVIVa  I'm optimistic for the UK. We mustn't talk ourselves down - we're too often rather good at that in the UK. Despite the country's c 