TaxPersonal TaxAnger as rich get away with it

Anger as rich get away with it

Anyone looking at their own payslip or personal tax computation cannot help but notice the rather large sum that falls under the heading of tax.

It is perhaps therefore not surprising to discover a simmering sense of grievance when one hears about others in the UK who appear to be getting away with paying considerably less tax than seems appropriate to their income.

Prior to the Budget the press rammed the message home with stories about Hans Rausing, ‘Britain’s richest man’, and the small amount of tax he apparently pays. Rausing is not domiciled in the UK and consequently is able to arrange his tax affairs so that his overseas income does not fall into the income tax and capital gains tax net.

The mood generated by such articles appears to have led to the announcement by the Treasury that there will be a review into the issues relating to domicile and residence. We have been here before. A review last took place in 1995 and the consultation process then, as in previous cases, led to the issue being left on the ‘too difficult’ pile. It is hard to assess if this time will be different but one hopes that common sense will prevail.

There are considerable downsides to substantially changing the existing system. Many individuals in the UK who are non-domiciled contribute to UK growth and economic success. Their businesses provide jobs and they contribute to the VAT tax take. A draconian change to tax rules could lead such individuals to move elsewhere or at least curtail UK operations. The potential losses could far outweigh the relatively low tax take a rule change might bring in.

Even those who would argue strongly for rule changes would appreciate that any major changes to the existing regime would create considerable problems for those affected. These individuals would need to reconsider and perhaps unravel existing contract arrangements for themselves which had been formulated under the current rules.

With a review document promised for the autumn, there is still some time for the government to take informal soundings on whether any rule changes are necessary or applicable. While there are good reasons to seek simplification and clarity in this difficult area of tax, there are also strong reasons to think very carefully before making any change.

Related Articles

HMRC urged to clarify impact of income allowances on Self-Assessments

Personal Tax HMRC urged to clarify impact of income allowances on Self-Assessments

5d Alia Shoaib, Reporter
New trading allowance: simplicity, but not as we know it

Administration New trading allowance: simplicity, but not as we know it

1w Emma Rawson, ATT Technical Officer
Wealthy individuals could circumvent top tax rate rises

Personal Tax Wealthy individuals could circumvent top tax rate rises

2m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
HMRC tax evasion assistance requests double in five years

Corporate Tax HMRC tax evasion assistance requests double in five years

3m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Rangers tax case to have ‘dramatic’ consequences for football and business

Legal Rangers tax case to have ‘dramatic’ consequences for football and business

3m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Italy grants first successful non-dom status application to former UK non-dom

Personal Tax Italy grants first successful non-dom status application to former UK non-dom

2m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Industry reaction: Taylor Review does not go far enough in addressing tax issues

Legal Industry reaction: Taylor Review does not go far enough in addressing tax issues

3m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Does the Taylor Review sufficiently address the gig economy?

Corporate Tax Does the Taylor Review sufficiently address the gig economy?

3m Alia Shoaib, Reporter