Will the domicile rules go?

Posted on

Wednesday sees Gordon Brown's final pre-budget report. He's been in the job for almost ten years now and yet one of his explicit 1997 pre-election promises has not been fulfilled: he has not abolished the domicile rules. These inherently racist rules allow a person not born in the UK, or who is the child of a father (in most cases) not born in the UK to claim that the UK is not their real home even if they have lived here most or all of their lives and that their true natural allegiance lies elsewhere. The proof of alternative allegiance that is required is remarkably low. The benefit of providing that proof is extraordinarily high. A person who is not domiciled in the UK only pays tax on their income and gains arising in the UK. Income and gains arising overseas are only taxed if brought to the UK. This can almost always be avoided.

The result is the extraordinarily low rates of income tax paid by the mega-wealthy that I referred to yesterday.

Another result is that London has attracted more foreign billionaires to live here than any other city in the world. It sickens me that I live in a country with a bias to the rich when there remains so much poverty that needs to be addressed. It sickens me that these laws make tax paying optional for the wealthy.

Chiltern's have according to AccountingWEB, suggested changes to the domicile rules are likely on Wednesday. I would like to think that true. If not, I'll be increasing my campaign against them. I do know that the Treasury's review of the issue is on-going. That is welcome. But will this be the day when this massive and abusive injustice is ended? I hope so, I really do. But I'm not holding my breath.