By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 07:30 - May 15 by nrb1985
So in other words, you couldn't hack private practice or weren't particularly good at it. A story as old as time.
I thank you though for the other insights. The fact that 38 years ago you had a computer when some other chap or chapess at Clifford Chance or similar didn't certainly adds weight here.
I think you'll read that back at some point and feel it wasn't a great post.
SB
1
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 07:44 - May 15 with 1136 views
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 21:13 - May 14 by DJR
I myself qualified and worked for a number of years in a City law firm.
I left to find intellectually more challenging work, and also because I didn't like the ass-licking of clients that goes with private practice. It was also great to be freed from things like timesheets and billing.
I joined the civil service in 1987, and our office was well ahead of the City law firms in terms of technology because we each had desk top computers. And one bright spark in our office had developed a programme which enabled us to turn individual word perfect documents into something that was identical in terms of looks to the Bills that Parliament produce. This was useful when it came to considering the iterations of successive drafts, and was taken up by the Houses of Parliament, when in the past it was all type-set.
[Post edited 15 May 7:19]
Just because I'm a pedant, it's "program" for computers, not "programme".
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 21:12 - May 14 by BanksterDebtSlave
Out of interest, have you ever been to Stockholm?
Been, yes. Great coffee, efficient trains, and funnily enough—a country that realised chasing away wealth doesn’t fund schools.
I have also lived in Switzerland where people arguably have the highest quality of life in the world and, get this to really blow your mind, - wealthy people, high earners and strategically important multi national companies can actually negotiate their own tax rates!
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 07:43 - May 15 by StokieBlue
I think you'll read that back at some point and feel it wasn't a great post.
SB
Nah - appreciate where you're coming from but don't think I've said anything not inkeeping with the rather sneery and condescending tone he started off with before he even knew me or what my profession was.
"He probably read it in the Telegraph so it must be true" chortle chortle, scoff scoff.
And there's only one post in this thread that's been reported for abuse and it's certainly not mine (Cue I'm sure now numerous people reporting me for abuse).
-1
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 08:10 - May 15 with 1017 views
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 08:06 - May 15 by nrb1985
Been, yes. Great coffee, efficient trains, and funnily enough—a country that realised chasing away wealth doesn’t fund schools.
I have also lived in Switzerland where people arguably have the highest quality of life in the world and, get this to really blow your mind, - wealthy people, high earners and strategically important multi national companies can actually negotiate their own tax rates!
[Post edited 15 May 8:10]
"Wealth people, high earners and strategically important multi national companies can actually negotiate their own tax rates!"
Given they do that in Nigeria too, not sure that's the slam dunk you think it is.
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 08:10 - May 15 by bluelagos
"Wealth people, high earners and strategically important multi national companies can actually negotiate their own tax rates!"
Given they do that in Nigeria too, not sure that's the slam dunk you think it is.
You would know this far better than me of course but Africa and other frontier markets have their own set of unique issues and challenges that play into that.
I used to have a large number of African clients so have spent time in Rwanda (which is booming now as you know), Kenya and Ghana - so I'm fairly well versed in the "inefficiencies" of the tax system in parts of the region.
Obviously I don't know as as much as you on the subject, and I'm yet to have the pleasure of visiting Nigeria, but I'm sure you get the point I'm making re idiosyncratic issues.
[Post edited 15 May 12:10]
0
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 08:17 - May 15 with 991 views
I'm just glad we have the likes of nrb1985 to go into bat for the super rich, because lord knows those guys don't have their voices heard and are constantly the victims of our political and economic system. Good on him for fighting for the little guy so robustly and coming out of it looking like a champ.
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 08:06 - May 15 by nrb1985
Been, yes. Great coffee, efficient trains, and funnily enough—a country that realised chasing away wealth doesn’t fund schools.
I have also lived in Switzerland where people arguably have the highest quality of life in the world and, get this to really blow your mind, - wealthy people, high earners and strategically important multi national companies can actually negotiate their own tax rates!
[Post edited 15 May 8:10]
Is that stockholm in sweden. Where taxes are markedly higher than ours to fund excellent services?
1
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 18:25 - May 16 with 629 views
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 20:47 - May 14 by nrb1985
All the more reason you'd want them here in the UK paying tax and not in Italy or elsewhere I would have thought?
Every little bit helps, sure, but my point was that it’s hardly a disaster relative to what’s happening elsewhere. The ‘sector of the super rich’ is outperforming all other parts of the economy.
And while the rich pay most tax in absolute terms, it would also help if they paid their fair share. When an analysis was made of the rich list a couple of years back, only 1 of the top 10 wealthiest people in the UK were in the top 10 highest tax payers. There are so many loopholes for them to lower their personal tax rate on income below that of the average person.
I am still happy to wait for the final figures, and accepted from the outset that Reeves might have to ease harshness of the provisions if need be, but this (based on actual rather than anecdotal evidence) suggests that the direction of travel is maybe not as bad as predicted. It is based on an article in today's FT.
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 17:45 - Aug 14 by DJR
I am still happy to wait for the final figures, and accepted from the outset that Reeves might have to ease harshness of the provisions if need be, but this (based on actual rather than anecdotal evidence) suggests that the direction of travel is maybe not as bad as predicted. It is based on an article in today's FT.
Starmer's principled positioning .... on 17:45 - Aug 14 by DJR
I am still happy to wait for the final figures, and accepted from the outset that Reeves might have to ease harshness of the provisions if need be, but this (based on actual rather than anecdotal evidence) suggests that the direction of travel is maybe not as bad as predicted. It is based on an article in today's FT.
"London Still Calling: International Tenant Demand Defies Economic Gloom"
[Post edited 14 Aug 18:01]
Thanks DJR for posting – same piece I read in the FT earlier too.
A few quick thoughts (and just to loop back to something I said earlier in the thread – salaried employees weren’t really my concern, I was talking more about the Mittals of this world).
But, If, when we get the full figures in 2027, the picture still looks the same, I’ll happily take my slice of humble pie. At the same time, I’m not sure there’s much to celebrate if 25% of the country’s highest taxpayers have left.
Anyway - the data so far suggests around a quarter of non-doms have gone – broadly in line with OBR forecasts. But that’s not necessarily a win – if it’s the wealthiest quarter, the Treasury could be looking at a hole of up to £6bn in annual tax receipts.
As mentioned, these numbers come from payroll data for the 2025/26 tax year. That means they don’t capture non-doms who aren’t on a UK payroll or drawing a UK pension. Most of my clients who’ve left don’t fit either category, so HMRC won’t see their non-resident status until January 2027.
If payroll stats already show a 25% drop, that’s just the first wave based on what I see and hear. My guess is there’ll be another 10–15% who never appear in payroll data at all – because if you’re very wealthy, you’re typically living off dividends, passive income, or trust distributions etc (and paying huge amounts of CGT and income tax on that to boot). Those are the people I/we generally work with – and they’ve already gone or are planning to.
Anecdotally, a small curiosity is to why this doesn't tally with Companies House records which show a 40% increase in UK company directors relocating abroad.
So, my feeling is the final number leaving will settle closer to 40%. On a straight-line basis that’s about £5bn lost each year in tax – but if the top tier are overrepresented (which seems likely) it could be nearer £8bn.
So, if the numbers still look the same in 2027, I’ll gladly admit I was wrong. But even so, losing a quarter of your wealthiest taxpayers? That’s not something I’d be raising a glass to just yet...
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
