The Chancellor’s days at No 11 Downing Street are drawing to an end – and I can’t wait for the removal men to come along and haul away her clobber.

Rachel Reeves has been an unmitigated disaster from the word go. The sooner she goes, the better for all of our finances.

Since taking office nearly two years ago she has swamped businesses and households in a stultifying quagmire of taxes, killing any chances of the UK economy moving forward. She’s dragged the nation down, not up.

Many of these tax hikes have had awful consequences for the economy, most notably the imposition of higher National Insurance bills on businesses. Jobs have been lost and good businesses have gone to the wall.

As for her relentless assault on personal wealth, nothing has escaped her tax-grabbing mitts, whether it’s our pensions, investments or savings. She has compromised the nation’s savings habit.

Although we can debate which of Reeves’ anti-savings measures has most hit our ability to build long-term wealth, it’s her meddling with the individual savings account (Isa) which best defines her reign as Chancellor.

An intervention ill thought-out, complicated for both savers and investors to grasp, and 100 per cent anti-wealth.

In attempting to encourage more people to use Isas to invest – in turn boosting economic growth – Reeves has come up with changes that undermine a fantastic savings and investment vehicle which millions of households are relying on to see them through retirement.

Indeed, come next April, it will no longer be possible to refer to Isas as tax-free. How absurd and deeply damaging that is.

Only a Labour Chancellor could violate the Isa brand.

Regular readers will be well aware of some of the Isa changes heading our way.

From the start of the new tax year in April, only those aged 65 and over will be allowed to contribute up to £20,000 a year into a cash Isa.

Younger savers will face a lower annual cash Isa limit of £12,000, although they will be able to use the rest of their £20,000 annual Isa allowance to invest in a stocks and shares Isa. Those employing Isas solely to invest will still be able to contribute a maximum £20,000 a year.

These changes could have been far worse if it hadn’t been for our relentless campaigning on the issue (Hands Off Our Cash Isas). But it’s the Chancellor’s tinkering with the mechanics of stocks and shares Isas that beggars belief.

The gory detail was spelt out in a ludicrously titled ‘anti-circumvention rules’ factsheet, issued a few days ago by His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs.

I will spare you all the gore, but come April, any interest on cash held in a stocks and shares Isa will be hit with a 22 per cent tax charge. In other words, the Isa wrapper will no longer provide you with a tax-free haven for your wealth. Reeves argues the tax charge is designed to deter people from using an investment Isa to hold cash. I disagree. I see it as the employment of a sledgehammer to crack a nut by someone who has little understanding of how ordinary people go about investing. It’s Isa vandalism.

Reeves and her Treasury officials seem oblivious to the fact that cash is part and parcel of sound Isa investing. Indeed, it’s crucial.

For example, it’s often generated from holdings sold ahead of an expected market correction (a prudent measure). It also comes into play when an investor wants to change the composition of their portfolio, selling investments and then using the cash to buy new ones (again, good investment management). Investors shouldn’t be taxed for doing the right thing.

Rather than encouraging more people to invest, I fear Reeves’ intervention in the Isa market will achieve the exact opposite.

With the introduction of tax charges and baffling age-related allowances, she has made the Isa world far more complicated and less attractive.

In years to come, when we have nothing better to do on a Sunday afternoon but talk about Rachel Reeves’ lasting legacy as Chancellor of the Exchequer, I imagine we will refer to her as the occupant of No 11 who destroyed Isas. In much the same vein as we now talk about Gordon Brown as the architect behind the demise of final-salary pensions in the private sector.

How sad.

How Labour.