Close Menu
    Vereinigtes Königreich

    Beamte fürchten, Labours hartes Vorgehen gegen Non-Dom-Bürger würde möglicherweise kein Geld einbringen – Aufsichtsbehörde könnte zu dem Schluss kommen, dass die Auswanderung vermögender Personen dem Finanzministerium tatsächlich Einnahmen kosten könnte


    Beamte fürchten, Labours hartes Vorgehen gegen Non-Dom-Bürger würde möglicherweise kein Geld einbringen – Aufsichtsbehörde könnte zu dem Schluss kommen, dass die Auswanderung vermögender Personen dem Finanzministerium tatsächlich Einnahmen kosten könnte

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/sep/25/labour-crackdown-on-non-doms-may-raise-no-money-officials-fear

    Von ParkedUpWithCoffee

    View 7 Comments

    7 Comments

    1. jammy_b on

      Quelle surprise.

      Only stubborn ideologues refused to understand that this is the case.

    2. Desperate-Oven-139 on

      Reading the article, it all sounds completely speculative. End of the day nobody knows what will actually come out in the wash.

      There’s a big difference between Mayfair and Lisbon, Knightsbridge and Mumbai – I’m sure a few will leave, but if you have £750 million in the bank, paying an extra £10 million a year in taxes is hardly a sacrifice.

    3. KormetDerFrag on

      So the people who already pay no money are going to leave and still pay no money, except this time not use our infrastructure for free

    4. FuzzBuket on

      And it’s speculative.

      Fundamentally London is still a strong financial centre. The rich would already make more in NY or dubai. So the idea that even the slightest nudge would cause mass capital flight simply insnt dealing in reality. 

      Is the full scrapping of non-dom that bar? Who knows. Clearly from the article the OBR  doesn’t, and those who’ll be affected won’t give an answer against their interests. 

      If your basing your laws on ethics it should be scrapped. If your basing your laws on reality then a reduced rate is cautious. 

      Being against any change at all is utterly ideological, rather than good policy.  

    5. kingsuperfox on

      Yes but at least it means they have to go live somewhere else. That is a definite benefit. Flushing the toilet costs your water bill but you still do it.

    6. marquess_rostrevor on

      Sounds rather speculative however it does interest me that it’s the Guardian publishing it.

    7. Dry_Sandwich_860 on

      I would be completely fine with this. Those ****ers take advantage of our services and use their money to push up property prices and influence our politics. They need to pay their share. It’s a scandal that this has gone on for so long.

      London is overflowing with wealthy foreigners. This is not an insignificant issue.

    Leave A Reply