Let the Non-Doms and Millionaires leave! I'm tired of Britain being held hostage to their wealth hoarding

Contrary to attempts by libertarians to spook the Labour government, rich people leaving has a minimal impact on the UK

The worries being expressed over a small number of rich people choosing to leave the UK looks to me like a storm in a teacup manufactured by Conservative and libertarian lobbyists working on behalf of rich donors wishing to avoid paying their fair share. This is by no means the first time that they have held us hostage to their wealth hoarding by demanding tax privileges. Many of these people would have left the UK anyway, regardless of the Labour government changing the tax rules around inheritance and so-called ‘non-dom’ status, for reasons such as seeking sunnier climes in retirement, and avoiding the impacts of Brexit, as well as uncomfortable scrutiny over association with Vladimir Putin’s genocidal regime of mass murder and child kidnapping, among other things.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has now, mistakenly, partially reversed the decision and is apparently more ‘relaxed’ around the questionable tax status of non-doms, after being spooked by the publication of a report by wealth management and lobbying firm Henley & Partners. They cite figures of Britain losing 16,500 millionaires in the post-Brexit period 2017-23. It needs to be said clearly here, that Henley & Partners’ main source of business is - you guessed it - helping very rich people come to London to live, store their money, and, occasionally at least, do a little work. Don’t get me wrong. I think everyone should have the chance to do well and achieve their dreams. But the broadest shoulders should carry the largest load, right? But, bottom feeders will inevitably follow too!

Above: Famous former non-dom Akshata Murty, wife of former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. She later resigned her non-dom status after media criticism of her non-payment of UK taxes in the context of her relationship with Sunak.

The press has a habit of not looking very deeply into things, and loves a good moral panic, preferring manufactured sensation over plain boring facts. It sells copy - or clicks - after all. I know, also, that there are multiple ways to look at figures and draw meaning from them, doubly so when lots of money is at stake. So, I thought I’d take a little look myself at some statistics from the Adam Smith Institute; which, by the way, is one of those places, like Henley & Partners, which is congenitally disinclined to support any measure coming from a Labour politician or sympathiser.

According to their Millionaire Tracker, the UK is “set to lose the greatest proportion of millionaires in the world within this parliament … Many millionaires are wealth creators, setting up businesses and employing people across the UK, so their departure is a worrying leading indicator of economic health and growth prospects.” So far so good for stirring up a moral panic.

Before looking deeper I want to question the ASI’s blind assumption that the very rich are wealth creators. Maybe they are good at creating wealth, for themselves; but surely, the fact that they are accumulating so much, and much of that is stored in dead assets (paintings, wine, gold, yachts, empty residences) and offshore, is the opposite of creating wealth that can be shared among the nation as a whole. Isn’t it more aptly described as “wealth hoarding”? We all know in our heart of hearts, that after 50 years of the widening of income and wealth inqualities to a veritable chasm, that trickle down economics just does not work. It looks more like an upwards cascade from my lowly vantage point at least. There are good reasons - and good data - for demonstrating why “tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich”.

This is just 0.2 per cent above the expected figure, a truly tiny proportion of the wealthy in the UK and, in fact, a vindication of Labour Chancellor Reeves’s earlier confidence that the UK would not suffer if we taxed non-dom millionaires (and billionaires) more.

So, onto the Adam Smith Institute’s Millionaire Tracker. Among 3.06 million total millionaires in the UK, UBS Credit Suisse - yet another servant of the hyper-mobile wealthy elite - project a drop to 2.5 million by 2028. That looks like quite a lot. But wait, as a proportion of the whole population, the change represents a fall of 0.93 percentage points, from 4.55 to 3.62 per cent. Moreover, a total millionaire is one whose total assets, including housing, savings, and pensions add up to more than 1 million dollars, or around £800,000. With average house prices in the UK at £290,000, that doesn’t really tell us very much about the impact of tax changes on the super wealthy London non-doms, does it? It’s just statistical smoke and mirrors trying to scare a new Chancellor into favouring the already wealthy.

Helpfully, the ASI then takes us onto so-called liquid millionaires. This is where the smoke and mirrors get more complicated. Quoting Henley & Partners - remember them? - ASI state that there are now “602,500 liquid millionaires in the UK as of 2023, a decrease from 2007, where the UK had 708,500 liquid millionaire residents. This number will fall to 593,000 liquid millionaire residents [-9,500] by the end of 2024”.

Interestingly, this 106,000 drop roughly coincides with the period of Conservative administrations of 2010-2024 and represents an annual average decline of around 8,100 or so per year while they were in power; hence belying the notion that millionaires leaving the UK is a Labour thing.

The actual drop for 2024, when Labour have been in power for less than six months after the July election, was 10,800, or a measly 1,300 above Henley & Partners’ official prediction in early 2024 that the number would be 9,500 for the whole year. This is just 0.2 per cent above the original expected figure, and a tiny insignificant proportion of the wealthy in the UK. In fact, and contrary to the hype put forward by the lobbyists and billionaire-owned press, which the BBC and others unhelpfully fell victim to, it represents a vindication of Labour Chancellor Reeves’s earlier confidence that the UK would not suffer unduly if we taxed non-doms and millionaires (and billionaires) their fare share.

Above: Famous non-dom Roman Abramovich, whose British assets have, at the time of writing, been frozen because of his relationship with Russian President and wanted war criminal, child kidnapper, and mass murderer Vladimir Putin.

A reduction of 10,800 represents just 1.8 per cent of all liquid millionaires living in the UK at the start of of 2024, and we have little idea from this data which millionaires these were and why they left. It's also not clear whether this number includes those whose wealth dropped below millionaire status under the Conservatives, but chose to remain in the UK; and it doesn't include the Brexit effect in its analysis, where we know that many chose to leave the UK after 2016 in response to Conservative policy, due to their reduced flexibility to conduct international business and jet-setter lifestyles. Were these 10,800 or so the 'poorer' ones, who were rolling their pension lump sums into properties in Southern Europe ahead of planned punitive tax rises on property purchase in Spain, for example? And we have no data on the effects of population ageing here, as greater numbers of the Baby Boomer generation are retiring right now and playing 'A Place in the Sun'.

It’s obvious to any intelligent person that the recent tiny change in the number of millionaires leaving would have had no appreciably negative impact on Britain's economic position, and may not be much to do with the Labour government’s tax policies. It may even have benefitted the UK in the longer term; from the social and cultural improvements of such people leaving the country and taking their 'values' with them, even providing employment openings for Generations X and Z to finally get the jobs that they've been fighting for.

Indeed, why not just let the non-doms and millionaires leave if they want to? I’m tired of Britain being held hostage to their wealth hoarding. We’ve got far more serious matters to be thinking and worrying about than their petty greed.

So, despite the Chancellor’s, in my opinion wrong-headed, decision to bow to the power of money, I say, 'Good riddance, and bye bye. Here's your bus fare, and make sure to close the door behind you.'