Ever thought you could do a much better job of managing the UK's money than the government?
Well now's your chance. Well, in theory anyway.
And once you've inputted your answers, you can compare them with the rest of the UK to see how your spending shapes up.
As part of the piece, the company surveyed 2,000 people, asking them to take on the role of the Chancellor and decide how they would allocate budgets in a number of categories - welfare; health; education; debt; defence; crime; overseas aid; the EU; environment; other (transport, business and industry, culture, government admin, housing and utilities).
And in the East Midlands, people would have only spent half the money that the government allocated for welfare. In 2015/2016, the HM Treasury allocated 25 per cent for welfare, but the people of East Midlands said that, if given the power, they would only allocate 12.5 per cent.
Debt was obviously a worry for people in the region though as they said they would have allocated 8 per cent against the government spend of 5 per cent.
It was a similar story for defence for people in the East Midlands who said they would allocate 10 per cent to this area compared to the 5 per cent the government actually spent.
When it comes to crime, East Midlands residents opted to spend 9 per cent in comparison to the government's 4 per cent, and with overseas aid, they opted for 4.4 per cent, compared to the government's one 1 per cent.
Interestingly, with over 58 per cent of the East Midlands voting to leave the EU last June, the survey found that people in the region would have spent 3.5 per cent on the EU if they had been Chancellor for the day, compared to the 1 per cent the government actually spent last year.
And finally, the environment is clearly an issue for people in the East Midlands who said they would allocate 6.5 per cent of the UK budget to environmental purposes. This is compared to a government spend of 2 per cent and is 0.4 per cent higher than the national average response.