Broadly, yes I agree, but not when it comes to illegal immigration, as they don't contribute to the economy in the same way. That's the crucial distinction within the debate tbh, and that's where the helpful rhetoric gets lost.
Aslylum seekers are not illegal immigrants.
If someone claims aslylum how do you support them without giving them some kind of benefit?
Slavery you say?
Good point i think the actual term used was 'obliged' with a small salary involved.Slavery you say?
It is insane when you think about it - my village has had several thousand new houses built over the past decade or so, as has the local city and the surrounding areas. Would be very surprised if it wasn't 5 figures of new builds, which means 2-3x that many new people
As a matter of interest, which is your village? I work in civil engineering and there is a chance I may have worked on something near you...
"And the specter of left-wing extremism is rising as some protests adopt rhetoric that sounds like Hamas or Hezbollah without seeming to acknowledge the Hamas terrorist attacks that killed 1,200 people in Israel in October."
It's such an odd argument for them. "If you tax us, we'll leave"...so, we lose nothing anyway?‘I am moving – that is it’: tycoon speaks out about the end of non-dom tax status
Entrepreneur Bassim Haidar says ending the break is self-defeating as total UK tax take will fall amid an exodus of the super-richwww.theguardian.com
Good riddance!
Time for the once every 4 year rant on a ballot paper.It's such an odd argument for them. "If you tax us, we'll leave"...so, we lose nothing anyway?
Local elections today. Remember, All tory and reform voters vote tomorrow
It's not all bad. If you're lucky, you can get a free dog on the way out.
It's such a fundamentally unfair rule. I dealt with a lot of non doms and they just leave anyway after 14 years with no intention to pay tax on their offshore income and gains. And the invasion of Ukraine showed a lot of the super wealthy Russians like Abramovich who claimed it were dodgy as F.
My knowledge of taxes is pretty slim so i might be way out on this. Non-doms generate roughly 8 billion to the UK economy. Removing the status could generate 10 billion but that's based on them staying. If they leave the UK economy could be worse off from the 8 billion that it is currently getting. With other more favorable EU countries reaping the benefit as they offer better terms. So will the new system generate more money or ultimately will it lose more idk.
This is the unknown. The treasury would have provided stats to show the impact of overall of the change in the rules. But they are just forecasts. The reality is a lot of them will leave. Basically what these rules mean are that if you are rich enough you can pay an annual tax charge to not pay UK tax on your offshore income and gains (£30k if resident for 7/9 tax years; £60k if resident for 12/14 tax years). This doesn't include IHT which is the biggie for most non Dom ultra wealthy ie Rishi's wife, who conveniently came out to say she would pay income tax on dividends (39.35%) from those Infosys shares she owns (reportedly worth £700m) but stayed v. quiet on her domicile status for IHT should she die in this country within 14 years. And HMRC are currently consulting on the exact rules. As it stands the likes of Rishi's wife will just put those shares in an excluded offshore property trust before 5/4/25 (if not done so already) so it is excluded from her estate when she dies and not subject to UK IHT rate of 40%. Labour could change this if they were to get in.
