I was on the Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio 2 at noon yesterday, discussing the domicile rule.
The interview can be heard about five minutes into the programme, here.
As my wife said after I came off air, my real problem is that I really do need to get off the fence on this issue, and develop an opinion on it. My apologies for that. 😊
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I agree with your wife. The fence sitting was so blatant.
Fancy having what is only really a beneficiary of a bad policy advocating for his client group on a show about this issue?
So we had a provider of domicile revenue protection services who was far from objective- arguing with someone about a policy (you).
But this is after all, the Neo-lib world, where in reality the subjective accuses that which is objective of being subjective, calling it ‘normative’ and gets away with it by coating it in the word ‘positive’ and looking at a narrowly defined data set for credibility that defines a narrow money defined definition of efficiency as if nothing else existed?
Positive economics is the economics of the rich persons bank account. It is nothing else.
You did well – the ‘tax lawyer’ – again proving my point – used personal attacks and being typically Neo-liberal, told everyone that it was you who was being so.
Excellent that you were able to identify the real opponents of this legislation – the lawyers and accountants and other enablers of the wealthy.
I am not sure he was amused by that.
No, he obviously got the message, and didn’t like it one bit. But more to the point, the message got out to listeners, and VIne himself (does he listen?).
I think I might have persuaded Jeremy
Yank question: Are “Non Doms” UK citizens or do they just have the “Right to Remain” in the UK?
They could be citizens, but usually aren’t. They have a right of residence.
If the Nom-Doms are UK citizens in some cases then why is this even a question for them.
All “citizens” should be taxed accordingly regardless where their assets are held and regardless of dual citizenship.
Boris Johnson found out all about being a dual “citizen” when he had a nice little chat with the US Department of Internal Revenue Service regarding capital gains owed on the selling of a second (or was it third maybe fourth) home.
We don’t share the US approach on this
I have long advocated that we should
Domicile is a concept of public international law. It was co-opted for tax purposes as recently as 1914 – until then every taxpayer had the remittance basis on overseas income.
Domicile is a person’s long term home. It is distinct from immigration status, residence from year to year, and citizenship.
Everyone has a domicile. You are born with a domicile, inherited from your parents (usually father but sometimes mother), and you can adopt a new domicile by cutting links with one place and establishing permanent links somewhere else (or if your parents do that while you are dependent on them, and in the past a wife adopted the domicile of their husbands). It is in fact often an accident of birth and correlated with ethic and national origin.
There is no sensible basis for a vague concept like domicile to remain important for income tax, capital gains tax or inheritance tax in the 21st century. Moving to a system based on long term residence would be much more rational (and we already have a concept of deemed UK domicile if a person is UK resident for 15 out of 20 years).
Some people might leave the UK and others might not come. But the UK has one of the largest economies in the world. It does not market itself as a guesthouse for tax avoiders.
Agreed
But the UK has one of the largest economies in the world. It does not market itself as a guesthouse for tax avoiders.
Are you sure?
The UK certainly has one of the largest economies in the role in GDP terms. In the world top ten, certainly; perhaps second or third in Europe, behind Germany, about the same as France, ahead of Italy. Ahead indeed of Russia.
(As an aside, a protracted war is all about will and logistics, so there is no way Russia should beat Ukraine if the west stands firm behind them, so long as we are resolved to support them.)
I should have written “The UK does not *need to* market itself as a guesthouse for tax avoiders.”
We all make the odd comment we need to clarify. Thanks
“The UK certainly has one of the largest economies in the role in GDP terms.”
But is you have people getting poorer in one of the largest economies in the role in GDP terms, do the measuring terms really matter? Are the measuring terms correct?
They do reveal the capacity to provide for all
GDP data is widely available – eg. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD
But if you have better data than the World Bank do let us know.
It is all an estimate anyway – there is no dial in each country from which it can be conveniently read off.
Objectively the UK is wealthy in world terms (or at least has a high income). But the size of an economy in GDP terms says little about distribution.
For that, you could start with the Gini index. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI
The UK is not too bad – worse than some European countries, better than the US. On that measure, South Africa is the worst (the index for the UAE is surprisingly low so I do wonder how it is compiled).
I dispute GDP data is widely available.
Look at the latest ONS press release on GDP and there is no £ sight in it – I checked recently . Everything is a percentage change.
GDP data is remarkably well hidden in the UK, I would suggest.
Seems to me more “entities” are leaving the UK due to BREXIT than Non-Domicile laws.
From The Independent:
“When the most English man in England decides he’s Austrian, maybe Brexit hasn’t been the saviour of our national identity that was promised.
Fry has adopted Austrian citizenship under a law that grants the option to the descendants of Austrians who were persecuted in the Holocaust. He says it also allows him to stick his “tongue out at Brexit”. Given the number of people and businesses that have left the UK since the 2016 vote, has Brexit now turned Brits against Britain?”
Why are political parties refusing to address the BREXIT problems which seems to me to effect taxes more than any “non-domicile” laws.
Brexit caused a huge schism in English society. Even now, 8 years after the referendum. you will still see ‘arguments’ called Remainer rubbish. The politicians turned it into an issue about democracy. A non-binding referendum result, that was very close, became ‘the will of the people’ and any attempt, even now, to do anything about changing some of the worst effects is seen as a betrayal of the will of the people.
No, I don’t understand it either.
“…No, I don’t understand it either.”
I sympathise. It IS rather difficult to understand something that makes no sense.
That there is apparently no political will to ameliorate the conditions of Brexit separation is shameful in my opinion. I’d rank it as political cowardice.
The Link to my comment above:
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/stephen-fry-austrian-passport-eu-brexit-b2617503.html?lid=4s4wmgowyuae&utm_medium=email&utm_source=braze&utm_campaign=The%20Weekly%20Newsletter%2028-09-24&utm_term=IND_Premium_Letter