Accountancy Age and Taxation agree: the non-doms won’t walk away

Posted on

It's rare you read a blog that is as good as Alex Hawkes' on the non-doms from which I was distracted by Liechtenstein:

It's getting to the stage where I'm so fed up of non-dom whinging, I might leave the country myself.

Mike Truman has, as ever, an excellent piece on the subject in Taxation this week. In it he talks about the constant moaning of the super-rich about their tax rates, and concludes with the memorable line:

Some non-domiciles have expressed the fear that this may just be the start of a process which will lead to a removal of all their tax privileges; all I can say is that I hope their fears are realised.

Hear, hear.

Read the rest, but I particularly appreciate this which follows Alex's complete rubbishing of a survey on non-doms leaving the UK:

Tax campaigners and others arguing against corporate or personal tax avoidance are frequently vilified, usually in whispered tones, about the lack of rigour to their figures, or for their lack of understanding of the issues behind the numbers.

Can someone explain why this is different, and why it is acceptable to try and influence public debate with dodgy statistics about the number of non-doms about to leave the country? I haven't got a good answer myself.

Alex is right abut the whispering. Those who do it ignore the fact that we also back up our work with arguments, and are a pretty competent lot. That's why those who challenge us whisper, because they daren't tackle us head on.

Perhaps Mike Truman should have the last word on that:

What is not so clear is why the supposedly quality end of the market would fall for the apocalyptic and eschatological predictions of some of the self-interested in the non-domiciled debate.

Let's call it cash Mike. Sordid, but true. However, the truth does come out. It just takes a few brave souls to make sure it does. Alex and Mike are in that club.