Rachel Reeves has been urged to impose an “exit tax” on wealthy investors moving their money out of the country.
Resolution Foundation, a Left-leaning think tank, has called for Labour to hit those relocating overseas with a capital gains tax charge.
The people are peons to be chaken down as the deep state desires.
Fuck ’em.
I suppose this’ll be quite a bit more than the entrance tax she’s going to charge Aussie tourists??
So what if they cash up before they leave?
I wonder how long it will be before your employers or customers pay the State which will then give you some money based on your political views? So Farage pays GB News £100 a day while they pay TTK £1,000,000 pa. They’d better mark it clearly, so he doesn’t get it confused with Dale’s bung. Oops! Donation…
Resolution Foundation, a Left-leaning think tank
In the same way that Stalin was left leaning. But of course the Tories are Far Right.
Move it to bitcoin. Send an email to a server abroad. Collect at the other end.
Welcome to the Hotel California – you can check out, but you can never leave.
Rachel Reeves has been urged to impose an “exit tax” on wealthy investors moving their money out of the country.
That’s antisemitic.
What better way to encourage capital flight than to keep pre-announcing oppressive tax measures?
@ rhoda
“The Spectator” has identified £18billion out of the alleged “£22bn black hole” as arising from measures announced by the new government since the election. This may be designed to generate the remaining £4bn by the Non-Doms moving so much capital out of the Uk that the income tax on the income from those assets approaches £4bn
Move it to bitcoin. Send an email to a server abroad. Collect at the other end.
Hawala transfer system old son. Uniquely for the enrichment, utterly reliable & completely untraceable.
Seven letters, starts with “f”…..
A great way to attract inward investment, eh?
Isn’t there some international law on the subject of free movement of capital and the naughtiness of putting up barriers thereto?
@ decnine
No, there is no such thing as international law – if there was Putin would be in gaol.
However, until Robert Jenrick moves us out of the ambit of ECHR, there is a so-called “human right” not to have one’s possessions stolen as part of unfair discrimination.
“John Galt
“Under current rules, investors pay no capital gains tax on UK shares if they leave Britain for more than five years.”
So what if they cash up before they leave?”
Lord, save us from journalists talking about tax rules.
Capital Gains is (except for houses and commercial property) primarily a residence based tax. If you are not UK tax resident, you don’t pay UK CGT. If someone is UK tax resident and sells shares, they suffer UK CGT.
There used to be a wheeze where someone would leave the UK on 4th April year 1 then while abroad sell the asset then return to the UK on 6th April year 2. They would have been non-UK tax resident in the tax year 1/2 so no UK CGT was due. They’d obviously go to some country with no CGT. So the rules were changed. Now, if you leave the UK and sell an asset whilst non-UK tax resident and then become UK tax resident again at any time in the following 5 tax years, the gain is deemed to arise on the day you became UK tax resident again. Hence the journo’s reference above albeit no mention is made of actually selling anything.
No mention is made that (i) you have to have held the asset at the time you leave the UK and (ii) you have to sell the asset while non-UK resident for these rules to apply. And whether or not they are “UK shares” isn’t relevant. The rules would apply to any shares that you held before becoming non-UK tax resident.
As a side note, there were a few countries where weird rules in the particular tax treaty with the UK meant that the ‘5 year rule’ couldn’t apply and the old 1 year rule remained. Belgium being one of the countries. They’ve since closed those exceptions but for a few years, if you could stand living in Belgium for a year, you could get round the rule changes.
@John Galt – “So what if they cash up before they leave?”
Then they pay CGT when they cash up while they are still resident, which would (presumably, depending on the details of how the exit tax was worded) be the same amount.
One aspect of this (and other) tax proposals that fails to get adequate attention is the long term view. Suppose it it all works perfectly as planned and all the rich people in Britain have that tax taken from them, that’s not where it ends. Those particular people are trapped, but most rich people do not live in Britain, and those who might consider moving here, and thereby paying a lot of tax even under non-dom rules etc, will realise that Britain is not a safe country as their wealth could be targeted at any time. Do we really want to convince valuable, wealthy foreigners that we have a hostile environment for them so they should stay away, pay (presumably lower) tax elsewhere, and invest elsewhere? As a long term strategy that seems quite disastrous.
How about instead of doing that, we stop allowing foreigners to claim any benefits and start taxing remittances?
“However, until Robert Jenrick moves us out of the ambit of ECHR, there is a so-called “human right” not to have one’s possessions stolen as part of unfair discrimination.”
I think you’ll find that ‘human rights’ only apply to criminals and illegal immigrants. People having their assets taxed into oblivion need not apply.
@ Jim
“Human Rights” are, however regrettable, universal conditional only upon one being defined as human. What you are saying is that those tasked with upholding these “Rights” will apply a Two-Tier system.
[Superman is not human so he doesn’t get to claim human rights]
““Human Rights” are, however regrettable, universal conditional only upon one being defined as human. What you are saying is that those tasked with upholding these “Rights” will apply a Two-Tier system.”
There’s no such thing as ‘universal human rights’. There’s only rights that can be and will be enforced, by someone with more power than you. Ergo if the human rights that are being enforced apply to person X but not person Y, then person Y has no human rights. If they aren’t enforced they don’t exist. And we all know that the right to not have your income and assets taxed does not feature in any of the HR legislation. So I say again – as a taxpayer you have no rights. The State can tax as much as it likes, and the courts won’t lift a finger to help you.