So the government\’s proposing some changes to the investor visa rules. Essentially, rich foreigners who want to come and invest their money in the UK, creating jobs, raising local wages, will find it easier to get he piece of paper they need to do so.

Guess who?

And how long, I wonder, before people begin to become seriously angry about this blatant abuse that is intended to shift the burden of tax from capital onto the long term resident population of the UK?Because remember too, all those new residents will have access to the domicile rule – and the mean to buy their way out of tax in this country as a consequence.

Rarely have I seen such a batant poilicy intended to shift welath from the poorest in our communtiy to the richest. Because have no doubt, that is exactly what is intended to happen as a result of these policies.


Johnny Foreigner brings in his money to create a business which employs Brits, thus, ceteris paribus, raising wages, and this is shifting wealth from the poorest to the richest?


And, umm, the domicile rules….but these visas mean that they become resident when they invest in their business. So everything they earn from their business in the UK will be taxed in the UK: because they are resident.

We get more investment, higher wages, more jobs and higher taxe revenue.

Just what is the objection here?

13 thoughts on “Eh?”

  1. Never changes.

    Short-sighted, boulder on the shoulder, ignorant (and that is not an insult, I am ignorant of many things) knee-jerk populism.

    Does he have any money to invest?

  2. I thought ” the long term resident population of the UK” was where he wanted the tax burden to fall.

    You know, all this stuff about people paying the proper tax in the country where they are resident?

  3. “Just what is the objection here?”

    Rich people. Everything they do, everything they don’t.

    It’s impossible to have any kind of rational conversation with idiots like this: they are entirely driven by emotion.

  4. And he seems to think that any “deliberate discrimination on the basis of property” is a violation of fundamental human rights – like charging a higher price for stalls seats, I suppose. The bonkersness is rich and dense, layered with emotion and studded with bits of knowledge and quotation, like a christmas pudding – don’t eat it, just admire it.

  5. ““Just what is the objection here?”

    Rich people. Everything they do, everything they don’t.”

    Spot on.

    Since no-one can win, why does anyone ever play Ritchie’s little game?

  6. As it’s not long after Burns Night, I wonder if Richie might consider this poem of his:

    Oh wad some power the giftie gie us
    To see oursel’s as others see us!
    It wad frae monie a blunder free us,
    And foolish notion

    In this post

    Richard shows how HIS TAXNESS expects to be treated:

    “Vanessa Houlder is a journalist who usually writes good articles for the FT.
    This morning she delivers an exception. When writing about tax protests she seems to have failed to contact almost anyone involved in the debate from the side that is saying that there’s a serious problem inherent in the tax gap in the UK.” [ie I want due consideration to be given to my views. That’s me, Richard Murphy, whose views are important, and not to be ignored].

    In the comments section of the same post, in response to a critical comment from a Harry Waterman, Richie says this:

    “Gauke is wrong
    And you look awfully like a troll to me
    Which is why I’ve deleted other comments you’ve made”

    Quite delicious

  7. The thing is, you can’t keep up this level of righteous anger, complete with all the comment deletion etc, for long.

    Give him another 6 months or so and he’ll wear himself out or have a nervous breakdown or both. It’s always dangerous taking yourself too seriously.

  8. Bastard, eh?

    They come over ‘ere. Wiv their funny foreign money and their ent-uh-prenoorship…


    Send ’em ‘ome.

  9. Poor Old Dick Murphy…hasn’t got a clue has he? A friend of mine ran a management business in the UK but was originally from a European country. His company employed about 8 staff. He and his wife employed a nanny and homehelp etc. When the fairly recent changes to the non-dom rules came about he wondered why he was bothering and so closed the company down, made the employees redundant, made the nanny and homehelp redundant etc etc and then took his wealth back to his homeland. A small real life example of how these sort of things work in the real world…something which Dick doesn’t seem to comprehend.

  10. UKliberty – I am sure Murphy would respond along those lines. My friend geniunely liked the UK, saw opportunities there, built up a business from scratch, employed UK citizens both in through his company and in his personal life etc etc…if the UK hadn’t changed it’s tax regime I’m sure he would still be there, paying his taxes, contributing to the UK economy etc etc…but if Murphy doesn’t want that…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *