Are the rich going to leave?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- In the run up to the budget I have seen claims that as many as one in five people are planning to leave the UK because taxes are too high. If they are, they’re in for a shock. The well-off and the wealthy get a great tax deal in the UK that they’re going to find hard to replicate anywhere else.
Link to the Taxing Wealth Report: taxingwealth.uk/
#uk #money #economy #politics #government #tax #labour #starmer #keirstarmer #old #health #life
ABOUT RICHARD MURPHY
Richard Murphy is Professor of Accounting Practice at Sheffield University Management School. He is director of Tax Research LLP and the author of the Funding the Future blog. His best known book is ‘The Joy of Tax’.
This video was edited by Thomas Murphy.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE WORK WE DO, PLEASE CONSIDER DONATING:
ko-fi.com/taxr...
RICHARD MURPHY ON TWITTER
Follow Richard on his Twitter: RichardJMurphy or on his blog: www.taxresearch...
HIT SUBSCRIBE & GET NOTIFICATIONS
Subscribe and get notified of new videos released.
INTRODUCTION: • Welcome to my channel ...
PLAYLISTS:
Accountancy: • Accounting
Economics: • Economics
Tax: • Tax
Taxing Wealth Report: • Taxing Wealth Report 2024
Green New Deal: • Green New Deal
Money: • Money
Questions from subscribers: • Questions
Miscellaneous: • Miscellaneous
#richardmurphy #richardjmurphy #economy #economics #accountancy #accounting #tax #uktax #ukeconomy #greennewdeal
Remember all the rich people who promised to leave Britain when Tony Blair became prime minister? Still here most of them from what I can see 🤔
@@christinavuyk2026 most won't move simply because they know other countries govts will tax them more
That will be the labour cabinet.
Phil Collins never did leave unfortunately.
@@jimshelley8831 He went to Switzerland. Fechy.
Their money has left.
The rich will never leave whilst they still have power, control, influence and ownership.
You are talking about the richest 1% of the UK population (and few of those have power) . What about the next 19% all of whome are likely property millionaires? You only have to look at what has happened in Norway to see the likely result. They are now collecting less CGT than before they raised the tax and had a debate in parliament on why this was happening.
@@Jem.Robson The wealth gap between the richest 1% and the next 19% is vast.
@@Jem.Robson we shouldn't be at the mercy of a small percentage of people
@@Jem.Robson It wasn't as simple as that. Norway also raised dividends tax rates by 20% so when the wealthy business owners had to pay the wealth tax, they used dividends to pay for it, incurring huge tax bills. To compound it, foreign companies did not get touched. So a lot of the Norweigan companies were sold to foreign companies. It was poorly thought out.
I'm so happy I made productive decisions about my finances that changed my life forever., hoping to retire next year. Saving is great but investments puts you on a pedestal where you wouldnt have to worry about savings as you do now.
Financial education is what we need right now for more than 70% of the society in the country as very few are literate on the subject. Thanks to Stacey Macken, the woman that changed my financial life.
I know this woman you just mentioned. Stacey Macken is a portfolio manager and investment advisor. She gained recognition as the first female trader educator; a renowned investor she is. Stacey has demonstrated expertise in investment strategies and has been involved in managing portfolios and providing guidance to clients.
Honestly, I'm surprised that this mrs Stacey Macken is mentioned here, came across a testimony about her from one of the beneficiaries on the CNBC news, she seems to be doing extremely well .
Been debt free for two years thanks to Stacey Macken. So sad to see my friends in their 40s with car loans, mortgages and credit card debt
She changed my life Financially I managed to grow a nest egg of around 120k to over a Million. I'm especially grateful to Stacey Macken, for her expertise and exposure to different areas of the market.
Excellent video. Thanks. Richard, could you comment on why Reeves won't tax the rich. I feel certain that it is,for the most part,because she and Starmer have been personally bought by the rich and don't want their gravy train derailing. Am I too cynical or does individual greed play a large role their decision making? Their acceptance of gifts might suggest that I am right.
Your right.
We desperately need good journalism
@@Mtmonaghan You are right but we also need laws to prohibit personal gifts to politicians (just like civil servants) and strict regulation of political donations.
I think they have fallen under the spell of myths like millionaires are job creators when they are not
I worked in local government, we were forbidden from accepting gifts with the threat of getting the sack.@@corvus1238
Most of their liquid assets are offshore and they can't take away their land and real estate.
That's not how it works.... unless you are non dom you pay cgt on all the assets you have. Lands and real estate cam be sold...
That's an argument for scrapping all taxes and replacing them with a land value tax.
@@MrAlb3rtazzoyou seem to be missing the point. If they want to cash up and bugger off, bye bye, they can cough up the CGT. Bluntly, I'd like every one of these leeches to jog off and flog their mansions and other grifted property. It might even adjust property prices down on normal houses.
@@MrAlb3rtazzo So what does it matter if land and real estate can be sold? They remain in the UK to generate future tax for the UK. And if you have assets offshore, you just leave the UK, sell your assets and then stay away for a minimum of 5 years to avoid CGT.
@@arandorapress7561 You are dead right. It would drop property prices. Existing homeowners might not like it but for those who can't afford a home it would be a godsend.
The Scottish government, SNP, introduced a higher tax rate for higher earners, (majority of taxes in Scotland are controlled by, ie a reserved power, EngGov) Labour branch office operating in the Scottish parliament tried to claim people would leave. They did not. They know which side their bread's buttered, abd get to drink clean water ;-)
Exactly. There are the well-to-do cum wealthy whose very wealth was accumulated from the society which begat them. Simply upping sticks and moving to a new country often presents more difficulty and uncertainty to the wealthy than staying in the country of origin, and a certainty about taxes is that they aren't designed to be impoverishing.
Nay, invariably it is easier for the poorer, those with less to lose, to move to totally new countries.
They also introduced a lower rate of 19% for those on the least earnings.
Exactly! Let the guys leave and have no return if their interest is only their self ego.
It makes it more expensive to employ higher level managers and executives in Scotland. Dumb idea.
@@physiocrat7143 No, it’s not. On a rise of AI softwares you don’t need so many parasites in your company. You can’t even imagine how many useless managers right now do nothing and sometimes just slow the company down.
Like all the bankers in the City who were leaving the UK because of Brexit - always the same recycled horror stories.
Except the British political establishment sabotaged Brexit.
The 'City of London' is NOT part of the UK - it is its own independent state within a state. The others being the Vatican and Washington DC. The centres of Money, Religion and military !!!
We’ve lost loads of bankers to European desks due to regs. You just don’t have visibility into it because you aren’t in the industry.
@@jimshelley8831 how so? We have left the EU. The referendum vote was to leave the EU and nothing else
Actually, some big firms left London for Europe because of Brexit and Paris overtook London Stock Exchange for the first time ever
Anyone with skills or money should leave, this country has become a crime ridden dump over the last 10 years and there doesn't appear to be any way back!
Absolute nonsense
I am an asset manager and indeed our clients are leaving the uk for Switzerland or italy.. just a bunch of my clients combinaeed last year paid almost 100M in taxes , next year there will be 100 M less of labour to spend.... ideology will destroy britain for good. I am not rich enough to just ove like my clients. But i ll do it as soon as i find another job abroad
@@MrAlb3rtazzogood, asset management doesn't produce, manufacture, or contribute anything that society needs.
Pure Greed at the expense of others is obnoxious
@Incognito-jf1dr asset management is one of few industries left in the uk . Most of others thing's shut down already si remind you that manufacturing here died long time ago . The asset managment economc impact in the uk is almost 10% if we close. Then next day , England would default.
You're asking British citizens to become economic migrants?
Countries with near zero taxes already exist, so why have the Wealthy not yet left? They won't go anywhere. UK Gov seem to have Stockholm Syndrome obsessing over the Wealthy.
Because most places have higher taxes on the rich
Data suggests that the UK has the second highest rate of millionaire (and above) emigration in the world, second only to China, though as a percentage of total UK millionaires it’s a fraction of 1%. However, given how the richest contribute such large sums in real terms, every exit will have a disproportionately negative impact on national tax revenue.
It’s likely that those exiting skew towards the wealthier end of the Millionaire+ club, which could easily mean that the hit to tax revenue will be worse still.
@@akastewart what data?
Branson's gone. Dyson's gone. That plumber I would never use, he's left. That's the tip of the iceberg.
@@adenwellsmith6908 Not to mention the myriad semi-retired, multi-millionaire ex-fund managers who are now languishing in the ‘miseries’ of a Caribbean tax haven like the Cayman Islands.
Do we care? The rich dont spend their money in any way that benefits uk tax revenue. Buying overseas properties, yachts, ferraris, offshore accounts etc doesnt benefit the uk anyway.
THIS
Because they actually pay a lot into the tax system. Sure their effective rate of tax is low as a percentage if their income but the actual amount they pay in is large.
I roughly worked out the amount we all would have to pay if just a small proportion of them left in income tax alone and every taxpayer would need to find an extra £150 per year. We are not talking a lot of people leaving.
Remember what actually matters is how much money the revenue has to spend not percentages.
What Reves needs to do is close the loopholes that facilitate not paying tax a major purchase like Lewis Hamilton buying a private jet and paying no tax on it. Or Gary Lineker not paying £5 million tax on his BBC salary. Or the other numerous highly salaried individuals that don’t pay income tax but divert it through personal services companies. The “progressive” tax system for PAYE means people who cannot structure their income any other way pay a massively higher rate of tax than anyone else. When you hit £100k a year you are paying 60% to the government. Where as people like Lineker are paying 19%. All money that you get coming to you should be treated as income and taxed at a flat rate. The more you earn the more you pay but when it gets to the government taking more of your money than you do it just immoral.
@@davideyres955 you are obviously unaware of tax bands and thresholds when it comes to income tax
The top 10% pay the same amount of income tax as the other 90%.
But who cares, pull in more poverty, eh
@@davideyres955Would be happy to see Mr Lineker 'flee' the country along with many other overated BBC presenters.
The very rich are wealthy not because they have high incomes but because they own valuable assets - land, buildings, businesses, stocks and shares. Their professional skills (if they have any!) may sometimes be mobile, but their far more lucrative capital assets are often much more difficult to move around. If you own farmland in Cornwall, office buildings in London and factories in Birmingham, you can't take these assets with you to the Cayman Islands and stash them in a bank vault! If you increase taxes on capital gains, rents and dividends associated with these assets, and their owners threaten to leave the country, it doesn't matter. You can still collect the revenue, at source.
Even if taxes do go up for the wealthy, they have accountant's that can find savings elsewhere in the business to compensate.
@@stuartd9741 I've heard rich people make this argument, but I don't believe them for a second. If it were true, they wouldn't bother fighting tooth and nail to prevent the election of a government that wants to raise their taxes.
You have just made one of the arguments for land value tax
@@physiocrat7143 Thank you. I'm very much in favour of steeply progressive land taxes, but I'm not a "single tax" Georgist - I think all capital assets should be progressively taxed - at higher, not lower rates than income taxes. Also, taxes on wealth in stocks and shares should take the form of redistribution of these productive assets to those who have none. This is real distribution of wealth, in the sense of economic power. If everyone has a stock portfolio which yields dividends, that's UBI for you!
@@andrewclifton429
Why would you want to tax capital assets? You are punishing people who invest in modern buildings and plant. Isn't low productivity a British disease already?
Company dividends consist substantially of land rental income. LVT picks it up at source. Why add unnecessary complexity. What does it achieve?
The UK is becoming an increasingly less attractive a place to live.
If the current government persist with their plans people will leave.
I’m considering it, and many people I know are. This was not the case previously.
The people I’m talking about here, aren’t the ultra wealthy, so the prospect of moving out of the UK is not a straightforward one, so it’s quite telling that people are considering leaving despite the complexities.
I left the UK 6 years ago, not for reasons ( I don't have lots of money ) . I was fed up living in a country that has gone so far to the right, no message of hope just austerity, culture wars , proxy wars and support for genocide. Why would I wish to live under that. I gave up after Corbyn was gone.
I work as asset manager and many of my clients are moving to Switzerland italy Belgium... so thwy find most of European countries to be more convenient from a tax point of view than the uk
@@bishilabashi people always leave. You make it sound as if it's a new thing
They register businesses in tax havens and have multiple passports. What people don't like is gov borrowing and tax being spent on rubbish or given away to foreign govs for wars.
...or given away to "VIP friends" for unusable PPE. 😊
Or for subsidies to wealthy Corporations and to private companies
So scrap taxes that can be avoided and replace with a land value tax .
@physiocrat7143 if they can borrow money that dind previously exist to pay the previous magic loan, then what are taxes for?
@@stuartpaul9211
Taxes are to stop too much money getting into circulation. Murphy explains it .
Tax is paid in pounds not in percentages. There is only so many pounds premium people are willing to suffer before they move to a sunnier safer and lower cost country . If they leave all their tax and company related taxes will go not just CGT, simplistic and static thinking
You are right , but people who folloe this channel are full of ideology and they just dont know , i am an asset manager and our clients are leaving , this is reality ...
@@MrAlb3rtazzo He talks with such certainty through ignorance it’s astonishing. Almost every sentence is ( partially) wrong. French experience in 1980s and other examples of capital flight should be enough. Britain is poor but managed to retain disproportionate share global rich, without it situation is dire.
@@MrAlb3rtazzoGo on can you put a number on how many have left?
..
I mean sold up, the lot.
Moved to another country clean break....?
@@Lilrom2003or maybe we're poor because we retain a disproportionate amount of rich? After all they're getting rich at our and our governments expense.
@@matthewdobson100 poor because many low education people, and many companies low productive relying on cheap immigrant labour. Visiting companies around Europe it’s obvious. If you’d move the city of London and associated businesses it would be as poor as Portugal
If I was rich I would leave after the tories have screwed the public services, roads, NHS, Transport, brexit, etc. What a crap country.
100% and what do they get in return for being overtaxed? More tax proposed by wankers like this guy. Hope he enjoys it when the productive people have all gone.
Great clear argument Richard!
But wrong. He doesn't understand economics, apparently.
@@physiocrat7143
How is Richard wrong?
..
It's true the lower income households pay a higher rate of tax as a percentage of salary..(very little disposable income)
..
Lets also be clear, the people in government are predominantly from middle to higher class backgrounds, and so will engineer legislation to benefit themselves/social groups.
& Not lower income families.
Example;
(Rishi Sunak paying 22% CGT..
when his income bracket is 40/45%)
..
Now consider the impact of 20% vat on low earners compared to a millionaires?
@@stuartd9741
All of his assumptions about tax are wrong.
1) he ignores something called tax incidence. The true incidence of taxes on wages is on employers, who pass it onto customers, or absorb it as reduced profits. The incidence of sales taxes is mostly on sellers, who absorb it so as to maintain volumes of sales. You can see this when sales taxes are cut; most of the tax cut is not passed on in lower prices.
2) taxes are passed on or absorbed until customers cannot or will not pay, at which point the business does not happen or the work is exported. It is the main reason why basic jobs like bus conducting have disappeared, why we have self service check outs, and why manufacturering in most of the western world has almost disappeared.
3) he also ignores location. 80% of the population is in the bottom right hand corner of the country. Taxes tip businesses elsewhere into the red; they are not viable, but many of them would be if they did not have the burden of tax. This is the main reason for the massive welfare bill.
This is basic economics that Murphy ignores or does not know about. Unfortunately neither do most politicians and policy makers. You will rarely find this mentioned.
@@physiocrat7143
Everything in your comment suggests the tax regime in the UK is not working effectively or is broken. If it's cheaper to off shore manufacturing.
This is the whole point of a discussion about who pays taxes.
..
In a civilised society, everyone pays taxes to live in that civilised society.
Thou some are able to mitigate their tax liabilities, this disproportionately reloads the tax burden onto the lower /middle earners..
..
Even just a small tweak in Taxes on the upper 10% by closing loopholes would even out the tax burden somewhat and we wouldn't be having this discussion...
..
It's true the south of England has the highest concentration of wealth.
This is because of better government/council funding and infrastructure networks.
..
If there was better funding in the north, the wealth divide would balance out a bit.
..
Case in point.
HS2.
..
If HS2 continued up past Manchester, Leeds, onto Carlisle and then Edinburgh this would open up more businesses opportunities as people could commute from other parts of the country.
By halting production of HS2 at Birmingham this in no way maximises the potential of a national HS train network.
..
In regards to sales tax. VAT is not absorbed by business but paid at source by customers.
.. I believe Vat should be linked to the tax bracket of the purchaser.
...
20% taxpayer
10% vat
40% taxpayer
20 % vat.
..
Same thing should appply for CGT..
Some rich people will leave, some will stay. Some less rich people will similarly make their choice.
One thing is for sure: everyone who chooses to live in UK in the next few years, will see their wages/savings/pensions denuded in incremental stages by the conscious programme of the increase in the amount of currency made available and the inevitable consequence of the pound having its buying power diminished.
It's the favourite trick in fiat currency's book; and one that never, ever gets mentioned by Richard J Murphy.
Currency value is not the sole function the quantity in circulation. Markets are affected by the buoyancy or otherwise of the internal markets as well as the trade deficits. An increase in money in circulation is a prerequisite to economic growth although I would agree that it needs to be directed at sources that have a chance of turning it into additional production..
@@RichardBergson
Money, or more correctly, currency, is commonly believed to be what makes prosperity happen. It is not, it is merely one tool that can be used. Unfortunately we are mired in a series of events in which governments use their respective currencies not with the aim of increasing prosperity, but in order to dilute their buying power. This way wealth is taken by stealth away from workers, savers and pensioners and funnelled to the state.
@@edwardmclaughlin7935 I think we may be talking about different things. Given that prosperity has to be based on investment that can only come from public or private debt. My view is based on the former.
@@edwardmclaughlin7935 those dependent on incomes to live are all but excluded from accruing wealth until they earn above an increasingly elusive threshold. The system as it is allows those with wealth to stifle the supply and increase the price of so-called assets. The most significant of which is housing.
If the rich or well-off had left housing alone as an investment instrument, all of this could mostly have been avoided, but when the disproportionate accrual of wealth starts to impact necessities and not just luxury items and the wealth hasn’t trickled down (which it never does), that’s when the the problems trickle up.
There was a period a few years ago when the Tories would often advocate for the super rich by pointing out that the 1% pay 28% of the UK tax burden. At the time, I couldn't understand why Labour didn't counter by asking how much the 1% should be paying, almost certain to be substantially more. Today, I understand better why Oppositions prefer to stay mute on any number of issues.
So why did Labour keep silent about the 16 trillion pound socialist penson debt?
Yeh they never quote the next part of that stat which is they pay 28% of the tax but receive over 40% of the income!!
@@kyam3331 They are completely deluded. They have created the mess. They have hidden the mess. Now they complain about the consequences of the mess.
Debt causes austerity.
The welfare state causes wealth inequality
Mass importation of poverty causes huge hills
Lack of investment is caused by the debts
High taxes are caused by the debts.
Cost of living crisis is caused by the debts
The 30% gross profit margin of the state is, you've guessed it, caused by the debts
Wasn't that 28% of income tax, not taxes in general?
@@charliemoore2551 The top 10% pay the same amount of income tax as the other 90%
ONS number, tax paid by decile.
Have seen countless people on YT saying they are leaving the UK because of various reasons. The reality is it’s not that straightforward unless you have large amounts of money or skills that the country you want to move to desperately needs. Loads of things to consider like language barriers, healthcare, schooling if you have kids, can you actually own property where you intend to live, visa requirements and local taxes are just a few pitfalls. Yes, people go to places like Thailand and some love it but many don’t adjust and end up coming back with a lot less money than they originally had. Not a decision to be taken lightly.
I've left in the past, Came back to look after my parents. The options for me exist. Problem for you, with the kids in school, you get to pay for the costs. 3x 3K health care. 3 x 3k Common goods. 2 x 9K schooling. You wouldn't have to fund my common goods, but I've still got that 3K NHS a year. 39K a year in tax needed to break even. You've lost the profit you were making on that. I was paying more tax funding others. 39 min wage earners consuming zero services [as if] have to work for a year to replace that.
@@adenwellsmith6908 Me too, was overseas for twenty years in two countries but as an expat. My housing, healthcare and other aspects of daily living were taken care of by local staff plus all related costs. Had I been the one having to deal with resident and work permits, paying bills and all the other aspects of daily life on my own it would have been impossible. My kids were grown up but what was on offer education wise was expensive wasn’t the best and you’d be putting your kids at a real disadvantage in later life. Varies country to country of course but the main point I was trying to make is research thoroughly because there can be a huge amount of hidden expense and pitfalls that can catch you out. Cheers
@@adenwellsmith6908almost incomprehensible
Adam Smith refers to "the invisible hand of the market" to explain why the rich won't leave in mass if we tax them more. They have other important investments in this country which they would be loath to give up- friends, children s schooling, social commitments, parents to care for,etc.
Also,if they did leave, they could not take real estate with them - factories, warehouses, leisure centres, golf courses,etc. . They could sell it to other rich folks who would then have to pay the higher taxes or leave it to state to use for the benefit of the rest of us.
@@ianoliver3130 I've moved for 8 years.
On the real estate front, correct they can't take it. They can sell that's one option. They can mortgage up, which means on death, you can't even tax the value becuase the value is property value less debt.
But money leaves, shares leave. There are lots of wealth that is completely mobile and can be moved with a click. A lot will have gone, and you can't tax it.
Very good video
If I was wealthy I wouldn't live in Britain full stop , just because there are better places and warmer climates around the world , but although I'm none of these ,I would still leave Britain , Its not my island anymore , I have no stake in it .
That's the sad reality mate
Stake in what way ? Please explain if you care too.
I don't see how they benefit britain. They've been here decades and this country is going down hill. Last night I heard on Sky news about a port was supposedly having 1billion invested in it but that is not going ahead now due to these new workers rights but then it turned put it was that P&O ferry or whatever it's called😂
The top 10% pay the same amount of income tax as the other 90%.
So if you think they don't benefit Britain refuse to accept their tax.
@@adenwellsmith6908 They can leave, good riddance.
@@archvaldor How are you going to fund the state then?
The top 10% [forget the super rich] pay the same tax as the other 90%. Just 1% leaving causes a huge black hole.
@@archvaldor So you support axing their tax in the UK. You don't want their tax, so stop taxing them. More non doms for example.
@@adenwellsmith6908 All of us "benefit Britain" when we pay our taxes. It's not about that. It's about the proportion of each person's income paid, compared with others, and as Richard has explained, the wealthiest pay the least proportion of their income and wealth. Reducing that gap, not even eliminating it, will increase tax revenue and tax justice, and it won't affect the wealthy - they won't even notice. If Sunak had been taxed 25% instead of 23%, do you think he would really adjust his entire lifestyle?
The fact that there are billionaires in the world is obscene. There shouldn't of been a maximum value and anything above that should go to benefit society as a whole
But trickle down 😂
Trickle up. Where are the trillions the workers have paid the socialist welfare state.
Trickle down will never work.
So where are the trillions the workers have paid the welfare state for their old age?
Invested perhaps? Er no.
Spent? Yep, splashed up the wall.
How bigs the black hole? You're a peasant, stop answering questions you little oik.
trickle down economics never has and never will work to create a thriving economic model......biggest con trick ever.
@@howardosborne8647 Indeed the con job! Somewhat indistinguishable from being pissed on!
I was taxed on income at an overall rate of about 40% last tax year + NI + 20% VAT on spending + council tax. Isn’t this enough? Despite this heavy taxation the most basic public services are absent. it took me 2 weeks to get a Dr. appointment by telephone and even that required a lengthy debate with the reception. Council no longer bother to maintain pathways and verges or pick up rubbish from the streets and pavements. This country has gone into a death spiral
Hopefully this government will fix the mess of the last 14 years but we'll all have to pay for it, there's no other source of revenue.
@@Paul-eb4jpNot strictly true. BoE rates - IE the rate the Government borrows at - is still incredibly low.
And the return on fiscal multipliers is literally orders of magnitude higher. They could close tax loopholes, and borrow on the basis it will come back tenfold, paying back the borrowed money very quickly.
Them they need to stop sending billions to people who are already rich.
About 40%? You probably don't even understand income tax thresholds and the banding structure by that comment
@@Paul-eb4jpHave you actually watched this channel? We can spend for what we need and we can control inflation through tax. And the highest inflation has been in assets driven by undertaking wealth.
@@skyblazeeterno oh yes I do. I am talking a blended rate overall
Yes but the 30 year olds on 200k who are leaving would ve been the millionaire tax payers in a few years. The less well off and talented are also looking to better quality of life elsewhere!
They re already fleeing!! Maybe the oldies will tough it out but e.g. my daughter has several young highly paid friends who are booked to go. The young talent is not tied to the UK and are off to friendlier more pleasant places!!
You imply that people should accept the taxes because of some kind of loyalty/duty but why?? Where’s the service and quality in return?
Georgia.Portugal. Uraguay.Ecuador etc so many options for the young and mobile. Punitive conditions and ridiculous housing costs and living costs because of so many taxes and easy travel mean earners are already leaving.
There are plenty of talented people who are not in the top decile of income, especially amongst the young.
That's nothing to do with wealth or tax. That's because they're young who've grown up in a country that has abandoned them.
I'm not wealthy and I left at 27 for France. Whether I was being taxed or not would have made no difference.
Let them go...they are not worth it....
Ridiculously high rents...
Who do renters pay rent to? Those rich enough to have the assets.
The balance has shifted to the wealthy by way too much.
Oh yeah, life in Ecuador is lovely 😂😂
"Trickle Down Economics", somewhat indistinguishable from being pissed on!
We should be looking at lower tax and lowering gov waste of this tax revenue, the uk is dismissally inefficient in anything it does and instead of looking inwards the gov look out we need more. People need more in the pockets and are struggling more than ever with just maintaining a lifestyle
If the ultra rich pay their fair share then public services get funded and there's scope to help everyone out with things like reinstating increases in the personal allowance.
@FONASDeadlock but they pay there fair share in comparison to earnings I don't feel getting g punished for earning more is fair in any way you earn more you will pay more by the % of your earnings but to increase that % is not fair by its very means. I'm all for stopping loop holes ect but the gov waste horrendous amounts of money and societies just balmes the rich for everything
@@stevencalvert9454 If they paid their fair share then it wouldn't be an issue. You don't need to increase tax rates on income. But why pay 20% on CGT instead of 45% on income? Why is CGT wiped out at death? Those are the sort of loopholes that are being abused. There will always be an element of waste in governments spending, you can't eliminate it but you can improve the situation. That's not an argument for people not paying their fair share of tax.
@FONASDeadlock completely agree that's why I feel a 30% across the board is fair on capital gains also
Great video, it’s so nice to listen to someone that sees things how they actually are.❤
I think we need to distinguish between the rich and the merely well-off; lumping both together isn't really helpful. However, I do agree that the flight of the rich is simply Express/Mail/Telegraph scaremongering nonsense. Those who do leave are not going to be important in the grand scheme of things and many will simply frown and stay.
I can guarantee you that people are leaving. It's different to the past. London just isn't the appealing place to live it was. Crime is now evident even in Chelsea. I personally know people who are leaving. Also in your calculation, you ignored the income tax we'd lose if they left. If 10% of the top 10% left it would cost us massively more than the £3 billion you suggested. But it's pointless worrying about it, as they are leaving and there isn't much we can do about it now. The possible CGT increases were just the catalyst for getting the wealthy to question how important living in London is to them and ultimately it's just not a great place thesedays, even in the pricey areas.
They're not leaving.
..
Yes some will leave.
As Richard said.
People living in this country may have roots, house family, golf membership for example.
The city of London is a special place to do business.
This is not the case on other countries.
I agree things have changed crime is quite bad in C London..
As a buy to let owner, I pay a higher rate of tax here, but If I leave the country I will only be taxed 20% at source. It's tempting and I am not even rich.
Leave the country then
How much do you risk losing by moving?
Go then. The asset remains
Other countries have their own different issues to that of the UK.
You may solve one problem by moving abroad, but find there are local issues, that don't exist here.
Just saying grass is not always greener..all things being considered..
They don't necessarily leave, but the money/assets tend to find another layer of protection, see Thomas Sowell re this..😮
They do but we need to tax land and property...try shifting that
@skyblazeeterno problem is they will eventually pass it on to all freeholders
Not all land is registered by the owners. It can be registered by off shore companies making tracing ownership difficult.
So true.
What millionaires can ACTUALLY leave this country for, say, Dubai?
Course sellers. Personal Trainers. Influencers. Real estate speculators. E-commerce arbitragers. Retired landlords.
Nobody with a real business is leaving the UK. Certainly nobody who needs to interface with the 70m customers here.
There’s no low tax country that beats western Europe, Japan, west coast US. You pay to play, and high earners don’t want to move out of the premier division to the second league because it’s easier.
Furthermore, on the subject of Dubai, it’s Essex-rabia. An air conditioned shopping mall surrounded by holiday homes. Only supportive of a life lived on Instagram. The victorians all loved their seaside resort towns too.
For Switzerland italy Belgium , countries that are very nice and have low cgt . And the more labour hunt the rich the easier is for other countries to target rich pepe in the uk . If they rise cgt to 39% even france would be a tax even compared to the uk . So you dont need to go to a tax haven to pay less taxes then here .Rich people only care about cgt and inheritance tax if they have children
Dubai is actually a fast growing economy on every sector your is just a racist prejudice. And most of Europan country have already a higher productivity than england and are far more business friendly. I remind tou that after brexit , if you open a companh in the uk , it is a nightmare to export to europe, the bigggest market in the world. Your comment is just full of nationalism and racism not even nigel farage would agree with you
@@MrAlb3rtazzocgt is not going to be hiked to 39% that is media scaremongerig.
It's likely the cgt rate will increase by about 2/3 % points..
Remember when lizz u truss tried to implement her changes, the markers reacted accordingly.
If RR hiked cgt to 39% the markets would react badly..
First of all, this message needs to be heard and not the carefully planted "the rich will all leave reports in the media" and very useful to have a hypothetical scenario at the end. The scenario however needs to be expanded a bit. A rich person leaving doesn't just stop paying CGT but also all the other taxes they pay. It's worth quantifying what that might be too.
Yes I think they like to use big sounding numbers when they talk about millionaires etc. leaving. A few months ago they were going on about 9,500 might leave because of a Labour government. Then you discover there are over 600,000 millionaires in the UK and 9,500 therefore represents just one and a half percent of them.
It is true and fair that the wealthy should pay more tax. However, the rich can go to places like Jersey to live to avoid tax. You can then "really" live anywhere in the world for up to 6 months before you must pay tax in that country. I believe it was the Chelsea manager Roman Abramovich who spent sightly less than 6 months in the UK each year to avoid UK tax. He would then jet off somewhere else for several months - but always staying less than 6 months in any country.
I think this also applies to Sir Jim Ratcliff. So, the issue is not so simple.
I would have thought, living just 6 months then having to move to another country would get old very quick...
..
Sounds good on paper, but in reality tedious.
"They are getting a free ride at the expense of the rest of us."
So you want them to leave? We'd be better off financially if they leave? It will save us the expense?
Can this be explained or is it just hyperbole?
If you think none will leave you are delusional. Many of the richest are some of the stingiest people alive. Just look at ‘Sir’ Jim Ratcliffe, owner of Ineos and now part owner of Man Utd. Worth around £30 billion. In September 2020, Ratcliffe officially changed his tax residence from Hampshire to Monaco, a move that it was estimated will save him £4 billion in tax.
No; *I* don't particularly want to live in Jersey, just in order to pay 3% or 5% less tax. Just so that I could afford a car with a top speed 6 times the legal limit.
But then, I haven't made getting rich at the expense of everything else a top priority in my life...
Lots of flaws with the logic in this podcast. If CGT goes to 40% behaviour will change and the tax collected will not meet the forecasts. What will happen is unclear.
It's not going up to 40%.
..
Most likely it will be raised 2/3 %.
..
Remember when Lizz u Truss tried to implement her radical changes?
The markets reacted badly.
..
And so would again if Labour tried to implement a 40% cgt rate.
Their money has. Branson has gone. Dyson has gone. That awful plumber has gone. The hedge funds have their assets offshore so they can't be bailed in.
They have left and even more. Even the middle class are bailing. That's the more worrying one since they are the ones that fund the mess
That’s the big difference a small number of very rich are one thing but the middle classes who are at or near retirement are upping sticks and as you say these pay the bulk of the taxes paid in reality
@@jasonaris5316 There are other things. Poeple who have wealth saying, sod it, I'm not working.
Good riddance to Branson , a guy born into privilege and wealth and Dyson too.
@@jimshelley8831 So you don't want people who create jobs.
Instead I bet you want the privately educated to run britain. Corbyn for example. Or Benn.
Anywhere you’d actually want to live has similar tax levels to the UK. You’d be bored out of your brain living in most of these tax havens.
How does this fit with the other video proposing that the way the world really works is spend and tax, not tax and spend? So I mean, what is the real purpose of taxing the rich more if we could simply generate more pounds? Is it that we don't think of it as raising money, rather it is blunting the spending power of certain groups relative to others? Thanks
Right-given that Richard’s stance is that “taxes don’t fund government operations,” it’s a point that would be better to express explicitly. In other videos he gives six reasons to tax, none of which involve funding the government, but, again, it would be better if he said _which_ of those six reasons, if any, he was addressing here.
@@jeff__w He has. It's tax justice.
@@helenheenan3447 Thanks, I appreciate that response, but I don’t think that’s quite right. He _does_ mention tax justice-which I would take to mean a fairer tax system-but that _assumes_ a reason to tax. I suppose the reason to tax (of the six he mentions in his other videos) that ties in most closely with what he is saying here is _reducing inequality._
When Richard asks “Would you rather have £15 or £27 billion?” it sounds as if he might think the government needs that revenue-he doesn’t, of course, even if Rachel Reeves does (it appears his statement assumes _her_ premises)-but I think it would make his videos a bit stronger (and clearer) if he tied them back, if appropriate, to the fundamental premises he laid out earlier. It would just take a sentence or two.
Novara media have an interview this week on this topic ruclips.net/video/cyXfr11g7So/видео.htmlsi=7Gn_mg3X51oivTp9
@@jeff__w You're probably right considering that many people watching this series of videos may be new to some of the ideas. Richard did make a recent video stressing the importance of repeating the facts and infinitum, so that they become familiar to people.
Taxation is predicated on the notion that government know better how to spend your money, than you do. I have never seen any evidence that this is the case. What is the price for a safe, clean society? 100% tax at source?
Well you don't know how to spend your money, do you. If it was up to you no doubt every road in the country would have a hard packed earth surface because everyone was hoping someone else would pay for it.
@@samanthastanley8409 In 1915 income tax was 17.5%, rising to 30% in 1918. That included fighting a world war.
@@borderlands6606 that's a very good example, because in the Council Offices Burgess Hill there is a picture of the town centre in 1910 which shows a hard packed dirt road through the middle of town.
@@samanthastanley8409 Taxes are at an unprecedented peace time high, and metalled roads have never been in worse condition. Ditto the NHS and other public services. Where's the correlation between high taxes and improved services? It wasn't satire to suggest 100% taxation.
@@borderlands6606 Richard pointed out that the burden of tax is being shared unequally.
In addition, no matter how bad the potholes are, they are still not as bad as a dirt road would be, given the rain we have had. You seem to believe these public services would be better if we did not collectively pay for them. I disagree. They would be patchy. Excellent in a few areas and non-existent in most areas.
It's not where people live, it's what they own. Will people sell up to avoid taxes? If the people who own (abuse?) the water companies want to quit holding those assets, that's fine by me!
I sold my business earlier this month, the money is out (after I paid the appropriate taxes). I'll be going with it all soon.
As a UK business owner, the benefits of being a company director and the changes to taxation on small companies over the last decade, (predominantly under the conservative govt) had removed any incentive I had to further invest in my own business. I am far from being alone in this mindset. Combine this with the punitive costs of living here in the UK means there are plenty of far more attractive destinations on this planet where I would now choose to spend the rest of my life.
The speculative new changes being made by the new Labour govt are the straw that broke the camels back to many business owners. Not the sledgehammer that is being portrayed in the press.
I have become disillusioned and uncomfortable with the direction this country has been taking over the last few years. The recent change in govt gave me no confidence that there will be any changes for the better. In fact, in my lifetime I don't think I've ever witnessed an incoming govt lose popularity so dramatically, so quickly even within the ranks of it's own party members and voters.
I spent a year researching options to move to, there really is no shortage of attractive destinations when it comes to taxation, lifestyle choice and cost of living. Even in Europe, despite Brexit.
Much of the agenda of videos of this nature on RUclips and other social platforms present a perpective to the public who don't really understand the difference between being Rich, earning a good living, 6 figure salaries, bankers or being wealthy. The wealthy are quitely moving everything around where it needs to be moved so as not to be effected by any changes.
The people making the law (no matter from what party they originate) on the whole are top 10% earners in the UK. Probably top 5% in reality. They will generally make sure they aren't too heavily effected by any changes. Jobs for the boys after all.
Once you switch off (if you have the ability to) your political leaning or allegiance. You'll soon recognise that they're "all as bad as each other" no matter what colour rosette they wear on elaction day. Frankly it's become a shambles and I'm delighted (and lucky) to be in a position where I have the choice and freedom to leave.
So Richard, this not very wealthy, not very rich, but comfortable individual has decided he's had enough and is off.
I understand your plight and genuinely feel for you.
..
But if you were a company director then you must have had some political influence at a local level?
..
The country is on a downward spiral because _we the people_
A.re not complaining enough to our elected representatives..
Working people don't feel like they have a voice being heard by politicians.
..
Lobbyists/vested interests shout the loudest..
And so politicians act accordingly..
..
I genuinely wish you good luck in your endeavours abroad..
A wise man never tells the world his plans.
Tax is paid in pounds not in percentages. There is only so many pounds premium people are willing to suffer before they move to a sunnier safer and lower cost country
I do not think the 36.5p number is very useful. Why? Well, last year for every £1 that my household earned, our wealth went up by £1.09. And we are a retired couple, on middling income (pensions). Not an unusual year, either.
Have you thought about trying to get this analysis in front of the audience of Novara Media?
Already left mate. Why? 100% because of tax. 3 friends have already followed me.
So you're an economic migrant. I hope your fluent in the local language.
Good riddance boys!
How patriotic.
@@Redf322 Patriotism is vastly overrated and nearly always destructive. It creates enemies where none would otherwise exist. The problem is the entitled attitude of wealthy Brits who think they can go to any country they like and be welcomed.
They should pay 60% of the wealth they created in Britain if they leave. If you make money from the British market you should pay tax in Britain!
How do you work out how much of someone's wealth was made in Britain?
@@grahamw453 It's perfectly possible by looking at the source of income from their business activities. You only need to replace the inspection staff who were reduced by austerity spending cuts, which the wealthy supported because they were not audited.
So, would you agree that income generated outside the UK shouldn’t be taxed by the UK government, even if resident in the UK?
@akastewart broadly, but with nuance
Like their shouldn't be wealth taxes on non-UK wealth, but if you use that capital to buy UK assets then there will be transaction taxes on that, and could be wealth taxes on that asset
@@grahamw453 if someone sells a company in Britain, they can move to Monaco prior to the sale and pay 0% tax in Britain on the sale of that company. So yes, we do know when certain things like this have loopholes which need closing.
I think this tax the rich is daft personally I also fell 42% tax on income is also too much along with all the background taxing going on this country is tax into suppression. A flat tax of 30% to include ni should be across the board and that's it. The more you earn the more you naturally pay but the % should not increase imho
The envious crowd on this channel won’t like any such suggestions.
@Killergoat69 honestly I think that is the problem it's envy and wanting them punished, countries are built on successful people along with the workers. The problem with the uk imho is the gov they have lead us to where we are and continue to fail the British people not the rich. The rich pay huge unfair amounts and why the use loopholes
Last time they hiked CGT the amount paid fell. A lot.
I'm 73 and Ive heard this nonsense since the 1960s.
its not the richest who will leave but a large cohort of the squeezed middle and wealthy retired
Where will they all go? You must have some thoughts onthat. Just a couple of examples please.
Yes I'd like examples of where all these people will go....
They have already started, capital has never been more mobile. Worse still well educated and energetic people are leaving for better prospects in higher growth economies. Never have more countries offered easier gold residence visas on easier terms.
The problem with people like Murphy is that they think economics is an accountancy exercise and thus if you could just get the accounting right everything else miraculously falls into place.
Projected net inflows of millionaires for 2024. Source: Henley & Partners
Country Projected net inflows of millionaires
UAE +6,700
USA +3,800
Singapore +3,500
Canada +3,200
Australia +2.500
Italy +2,200
Switzerland +1,500
Greece +1,200
Portugal +800
Japan +400
Jersey might be small and have a 40mph speed limit but on that theory the only place people would buy cars is in Germany for the autobahn. According to the London Assembly website the average traffic speed in Central London is 7.1-8.7mph so why have a car there? As far as implying tax havens aren't worth living in so live in the UK are you suggesting places like Switzerland, Singapore, the various states in the USA that have no income tax are inferior to the UK? Ridiculing to prove a point suggests you have no point.
Spot on, sir! 😊
Even more simply, you can't have capital flight with fiat currency. If you leave, you have to either keep your money denominated in Sterling, which means it's linked to the Bank of England and they can access it, or you have to convert to the local currency which means finding someone willing to make the opposite trade i.e. someone who is looking to acquire Sterling. The money never leaves even if the people do.
I like this guy
They already have gone where they can.
They don't have to leave.
It's their wealth that leaves to avoid UK tax , however much you tax them.
A proportion of the rich have already left and more will leave if they are taxed more. This has always been so and is so now. They will not all leave of course but sufficient will leave to severely dent any expectation of tax revenues. Sadly taxes intended for the rich also fall on the poor and middle classes, they are fairly blunt instruments after all.
After the debacle with P&O..who knows 😂😅
I assume this doesn't take into account student loans, as it seems rather lower than what I'm paying on my income.
Our tax laws are the way they are because the politicians who make them are either wealthy themselves, or they will benefit in some other way.
Excellent explanation Richard. In my view an Exit Tax at a high percentage to be applied when someone wishes to take their liquid assets out of the country, which were not brought in for investment, should address the talk of the rich leaving. A sort of wealth gain tax applied on exit.
It seems to me that it’s not the “rich” that are leaving but the skilled class of young people 35 and below who are leaving
Isn't it horrifying how much of people's lives is consumed working to pay tax so the government can waste it? Why aren't people angry? We aren't talking about money, we are talking about your lives and we see very little benefit for it.
I will not leave. My family is here and this is my home.
No, they almost all will not.
Next
Good video with solid research behind it.
Well Charlie Mullins has left but I've yet to find anyone who is sorry to see the back of him.
No one is sorry but somone has to pay for the taxes he was paying and guess who will be ?
Yeah no love lost there with Mr Mullins..
Haven’t they been here for the last 14 years, how has that gone ?
Well, the UK does have the second-highest rate of 'wealth flight'/'millionaire emigration' in the world, so… 🤷
I heard the UK had the highest out flow of millionaires right now, is that not true?
Second highest, after China. As a % of total UK millionaires, it’s still only a fraction of 1%, though the impact to tax revenue from their departure is likely proportionally much higher.
*Outflow of course sellers, real estate speculators, influencers, personal trainers, e-commerce arbitragers etc.
They’ll all be very happy in Dubai.
@@jacknakamori3280 You forgot 'Crypto bros'. 😉
It is true. But this guy is full of prejudice and he just doesn't believe in the numbers which don't confirm is hypothesis.
Henley & Partners claims that between 2017 and 2023, 16,500 millionaires migrated from the UK. Visual Capitalist estimates that 9500 will leave the UK in 2024. We can debate the scale and subsequent impact on tax receipts, but the outflow itself seems undeniable. Another problem is that "rich" is a very opaque term. I know a lot of people who are not rich in comparison to Hedge Fund bosses, but are skilled tradespeople or small business (e.g. £2 - £5m revenue) owners who have already left or are in the process of leaving - and I don't mean offshoring or doing tax dodges. I mean selling their houses and putting their kids in school in places like Italy, Bahrain, Dubai and so on. It is not solely a decision based upon taxation - but that is certainly a significant part of it. All of the people I spoke to quoted crime, perceived cultural decline and a feeling of overall getting a "bad deal" from what they contribute. Good video as always, though, Richard! Thanks for posting - I do enjoy your content as it challenges a lot of my traditional views.
We can bloody hope so.
If you’re not in the top 10% how do you know what we are thinking. Many have left, many planning their escape.
Then Labour's proposed reforms should target the the tenth decile only, or perhaps the 9th as well, ie where the 'true' wealth lies.
All the CGT proposals I have heard will not exclusively do that. Doesn't sound like tax justice to me. Quite the opposite.
at 11:30 The trouble is you assume that 10% were not going to spend that money in your economy where your tax system will capture the money anyway.
The rich don't live under railway bridges eating out of bins. They are the customers of many businesses and this is the orgin of all the taxes they pay.... Not hard to imagine a senario where you get the +27B but VAT and a load of stealth taxes declinesby 27Billion. Leaving a 3B hole.
The best way to get money out of the rich is to simply offer them overpriced goods and services. look at any airline VIP program.....
Simple answer yes.
Labour fanatics do not want to admit it , but as asset manager i am seeing our clients moving at a simply crazy pass ! most of them are going to Switzerland and Italy
Look for vacant sites between buildings as the rich load their properties onto lorries and relocate them abroad like Old London Bridge in Arizona.
The investment opportunities opening up with big labour projects (another Thames Crossing etc) would seem to me that this would be a rich persons dream. These PFI projects give bigger returns to investors than if the government borrowed from the IMF as the government would pay less interest in these than will go to the private investors.
Yes they are leaving. Several low tax locations are offering incentives to HNWI. The quality of life in the UK is no longer competitive.
If the rich left the UK, then workers would gobble up a larger share of the national income! WOOHOO
The retired wealthy wouldn't be there to spend or hand down assets. The ultra high earners would generate thier wealth abroad. Brain drain and lower growth
Gary Stevenson has a nice take on wealth taxes on the rich. If the tax is on assets IN the U.K. then it doesn't matter if people leave. They will still be liable for the tax. And if foreign owners won't cough up, the assets can be confiscated.
If they do it , nobody with money will ever come to the uk or they will leave destroying the brit passport. Also that would be in violation of the current double tax agreement with euope. But gary just care about publishing easy pseudo socialist videos for teen ager proposing semplistic solution to problems that are bigger than him..
I remember the BBC reporters shock when Jeremy Corbyn shadow cabinet member said we don't need billionaires.
You need their money to fund the mess that's the UKK state.
I hope they do leave because they don't contribute positively.
The wealth gap has just grown out of hand. Tax free dodges made to be used. Remeber the amounts written of before tax is due. The tax burden has to shift.workers cant claim for their transport .their clothes. Their energy. Their homes .
So, do we pair such a rise in tax with finally dealing with non-dom status?
Only the rich with any sense will leave.
The Polish workers left in droves years ago...UK is not a nice place to live anymore... Even rich people are leaving in big numbers for many years..replaced by low skilled immigrants causing a decline in public services etc.
Another great video.
The principle should be to tax money and not people.
That means includes all incomes.
The lower tax threshold is far too low.
It’s punishment and leaves political room for anti-tax advocates.
Tax is a concept for good.
As long as it’s a tax on money because it’s paid in money.
I sincerely hope so .
Secondly, it would be useful to hear how this impacts the economy e.g. if this money isn't in the economy anymore how does it affect gdp and the flow of money and does it help control inflation. The super rich spend quite a small proportion of their money. Most of it will sit in investments? Less investing could mean less growth?
Also, the billionaire, his assets, and his money, are all separate things that are mostly independent of each other. UK assets are typically fixed in UK, like real estate and football clubs. He can't take it with him, and which billionaire owns it makes no difference. Secondly, he is already very mobile and lives in several countries, keeps money in tax havens, holds multiple currencies, invests in multiple stock markets, etc. The situation is already so fluid and global that it's unclear what 'leaving' might mean or how it would impact UK people.
Did we notice?
"A third of British billionaires have moved to tax havens after an exodus over the past decade, a Times investigation has found. They are among 6,800 Britons controlling 12,000 UK firms from low-tax jurisdictions. The Exchequer is denied billions a year but many of the bosses still reap the benefits of British assets. Some have bankrolled political parties while living offshore as successive governments have failed to enact a law passed in 2009 that would have banned large donations from anyone resident abroad for tax purposes. Many have been awarded honours or hold titles, with at least one viscount, one baron, six knights and one dame among the billionaires."
-- A third of British billionaires have moved to a tax haven, Thursday March 07 2019, 9.00am, The Times
Let's try to avoid blaming the exodus for economically disastrous Austerity policies😹And weirdly, the billionaires left under the Tories. 'We must never allow the Tories into govt again. All the billionaires will leave!' [clutching pearls]
12:52 “They’re getting a free ride at the expense of the rest of us”
It makes my blood boil to hear such nonsense. Love them or hate them, there is no reasonable way that a segment of society that contributes individual tax that is typically many orders of magnitude more than each of “the rest of us” pay can be said to be getting “a free ride”.
Despite paying many, MANY times more tax than the rest of us do, they use fewer tax-funded services than we do, and have access to fewer tax-funded services than we do.
Love them or hate them, it’s not the millionaires getting the “free ride”.
Politics of spite and envy. Why not encourage entrepreneurship to make wealth.