
Starmer's Britain is good at only one thing: driving out the wealthy and ambitious
It doesn't lead the world in developing new technologies such as Artificial Intelligence. It isn't breaking new ground in science, technology, or even in music, literature or fashion.
Still, Sir Keir Starmer's Labour Britain is at least leading the world in one respect. It has become better than anywhere else at driving out the wealthy, the young, and the ambitious. There is just one catch. The Government doesn't appear to have any ideas on how to stem the exodus, nor how to replace all the tax revenues that will leave with them.
The evidence that money and talent is fleeing Britain is becoming more alarming all the time. Guillaume Pousaz, Swiss-born billionaire founder of fintech giant Checkout, has become the latest to leave. We learned this week that he has shifted his tax residency from Britain to Monaco, following the decision by the Chancellor Rachel Reeve to abolish the non-dom rule that allowed wealthy foreigners to limit their tax bills in the UK.
He joins the likes of the billionaire steel tycoon Lakshmi Mittal and the senior Goldman Sachs banker Richard Goode in getting out of the country. Over the last year, an estimated 10,000 millionaires have left the UK, according to Henley & Partners, second only to Russia, and the real total may be even higher.
But it is not just a handful of the super-rich who are getting out. The young and ambitious are increasingly leaving for the Gulf States such as Dubai or Qatar, for Australia, where the youth mobility scheme allows them to live or work, or for the United States, if they can get a visa. Likewise, the 'Henrys', or 'High Earners, Not Yet Rich' are fleeing as well.
It is not hard to understand why. The non-dom crackdown has created one of the most punitive tax regimes in the world for foreigners. They are now subject not just to our income taxes, but to inheritance tax at 40 per cent on their global assets, as well as capital gains tax if they sell their company. Many simply have to leave or face financial ruin.
Likewise, frozen thresholds and tapered personal allowances now mean many successful self-employed or young professionals face marginal tax rates of 70 per cent or more on their earnings (and even more if they are crazy enough to live in Scotland).
Perhaps worse of all, the dire state of the public finances means that everyone knows there is far worse to come over the next two or three years, with taxes rising relentlessly to pay for soaring welfare bills and public sector wages. The only rational decision is to get out while you still can. A desperate Labour Chancellor – perhaps an Angela Rayner-type – may even impose an exit tax, as other countries have tried to.
It is catastrophic for any country to lose its wealthiest, most energetic, talented, ambitious, and hardest-working people. They drive investment, innovation, and entrepreneurship. More than any other group, they create the wealth that allows the country to flourish.
But it is especially catastrophic for Britain. The reason is simple. Over the last thirty years, we have narrowed our tax base, so that the Government is very dependent on a small group of people. The top 1 per cent now pay 28 per cent of the total for income tax, and the top 10 per cent pay 60 per cent of the total.
For capital gains tax, dividend taxes, and corporation tax the percentage will be even higher. As they leave, the revenue collected will collapse. Even worse, as the exodus gathers steam, the Government is doing precisely nothing to stop it. Any rational government, faced with losing 30 per cent of its tax revenue, would be frantically finding ways of persuading them to stay.
Instead, Labour is complacently watching them leave, as if it makes no difference. It is going to prove a very expensive mistake – because the UK will find it very hard to get all those people back once they have left.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Auto Car
6 minutes ago
- Auto Car
What would happen if we all stopped buying new cars?
Enthusiasts don't buy cars as status symbols, but I don't think it's controversial to accept that people do. I've had friends and acquaintances ask what car they should buy next while in the same breath telling me how much they like the car they own now. So maybe keep that? Still, I think it's curious how often cars are the obvious target when people look at status-driven buying behaviours. I understand that cars are expensive, but we don't have the same discussions about conservatories, cockapoos or chips, and you can't even use those to get to work or visit your gran. What's also striking is that how many cars we buy seems inextricably linked to the country's prosperity. A large new car market is perceived as a marker of a healthy economy, in a way that isn't true of, say, toasters. Those we buy when we need them. Cars, meanwhile, we buy because the finance term is coming to an end and the cambelt will soon need changing, or the company decides it's time you deserved something shinier to keep you working there, so off it goes to be replaced by something a bit better than the neighbours have. But, as Oswald noted, 'modern cars have an enormously long life and are relatively inexpensive to maintain', so even if we paused buying, we would still be able to get places. And his point about longevity is true. At least it is for now. But, I wonder, in times of £1800 headlight clusters, multiple electronic control units to let cars meet emissions and safety rules at a cost of thousands a time and what often just generally feels like an inbuilt obsolescence, for how long cars will remain cheap to maintain into their later life. We buy enough cars when they're affordable to fix; how many will we get through when driving into a pheasant writes off an older one? I don't think the optimum number of cars for us to buy is none, and this is something that will stay only a thought. But if we didn't buy quite so many and more were simpler and designed to stay affordable, I don't think that would be a bad thing.


Sky News
13 minutes ago
- Sky News
'No doubt' UK will spend 3% of GDP on defence in next parliament, defence secretary says
There is "no doubt" the UK "will spend 3% of our GDP on defence" in the next parliament, the defence secretary has said. John Healey's comments come ahead of the publication of the government's Strategic Defence Review (SDR) on Monday. This is an assessment of the state of the armed forces, the threats facing the UK, and the military transformation required to meet them. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has previously set out a "clear ambition" to raise defence spending to 3% in the next parliament "subject to economic and fiscal conditions". Mr Healey has now told The Times newspaper there is a "certain decade of rising defence spending" to come, adding that this commitment "allows us to plan for the long term. It allows us to deal with the pressures." A government source insisted the defence secretary was "expressing an opinion, which is that he has full confidence that the government will be able to deliver on its ambition", rather than making a new commitment. The UK currently spends 2.3% of GDP on defence, with Sir Keir announcing plans to increase that to 2.5% by 2027 in February. This followed mounting pressure from the White House for European nations to do more to take on responsibility for their own security and the defence of Ukraine. The 2.3% to 2.5% increase is being paid for by controversial cuts to the international aid budget, but there are big questions over where the funding for a 3% rise would be found, given the tight state of government finances. While a commitment will help underpin the planning assumptions made in the SDR, there is of course no guarantee a Labour government would still be in power during the next parliament to have to fulfil that pledge. 1:21 A statement from the Ministry of Defence makes it clear that the official government position has not changed in line with the defence secretary's comments. The statement reads: "This government has announced the largest sustained increase to defence spending since the end of the Cold War - 2.5% by 2027 and 3% in the next parliament when fiscal and economic conditions allow, including an extra £5bn this financial year. "The SDR will rightly set the vision for how that uplift will be spent, including new capabilities to put us at the leading edge of innovation in NATO, investment in our people and making defence an engine for growth across the UK - making Britain more secure at home and strong abroad." Sir Keir commissioned the review shortly after taking office in July 2024. It is being led by Lord Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary and NATO secretary general. The Ministry of Defence has already trailed a number of announcements as part of the review, including plans for a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command and a £1bn battlefield system known as the Digital Targeting Web, which we're told will "better connect armed forces weapons systems and allow battlefield decisions for targeting enemy threats to be made and executed faster". On Saturday, the defence secretary announced a £1.5bn investment to tackle damp, mould and make other improvements to poor quality military housing in a bid to improve recruitment and retention. Mr Healey pledged to "turn round what has been a national scandal for decades", with 8,000 military family homes currently unfit for habitation. He said: "The Strategic Defence Review, in the broad, will recognise that the fact that the world is changing, threats are increasing. "In this new era of threat, we need a new era for defence and so the Strategic Defence Review will be the vision and direction for the way that we've got to strengthen our armed forces to make us more secure at home, stronger abroad, but also learn the lessons from Ukraine as well. "So an armed forces that can be more capable of innovation more quickly, stronger to deter the threats that we face and always with people at the heart of our forces… which is why the housing commitments that we make through this strategic defence review are so important for the future."


Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Amanda Holden passionately hits back at Ofcom outrage over her Britain's Got Talent outfits after her daring looks have sparked over 1,000 complaints
Amanda Holden has hit back at Ofcom complaints over her daring outfits on Britain's Got Talent. The Britain's Got Talent judge, 54, often steals the limelight on the long-running ITV show with her very glamorous outfits. She is known for sporting some bold ensembles while taking to the judging panel alongside Simon Cowell, Alesha Dixon and Bruno Tonioli. Her looks have raised eyebrows and have sparked more than 1,000 Ofcom complaints over the years, but Amanda has now firmly brushed off the criticism. Amanda said she works closely with her stylist on creating each look and insisted she loves every single outfit she has worn on the show since its launch in 2007. From A-list scandals and red carpet mishaps to exclusive pictures and viral moments, subscribe to the Daily Mail's showbiz newsletter to stay in the loop. She told Closer magazine: 'What you see on TV, I really love. 'I'm always asked about the Ofcom complaints, but every outfit on the show is checked before I leave my dressing room, so I'm never worried. 'I think people should have fun with fashion!' It is not the first time Amanda has defended her fashion choices on the talent competition after coming under fire from some viewers. In 2022, she said: 'Fashion is about taking risks. I encourage everyone to have a little fun and be a little daring. I'd be bored playing it safe.' She added that her co-star Alesha Dixon, 46, never cops criticism for her racy outfits, describing the level of complaints as 'bizarre'. The TV star's bold fashion choices on Britain's Got Talent are often a talking point among fans of the series, with Amanda repeatedly forced to hit back at criticism. In one very famous moment, a daring Julien Macdonald gown she wore during the semi-final of BGT in 2017 attracted a staggering 663 Ofcom complaints. The plunging floor-length dress plunged down to the navel, with a cut-out panel that reached the small of her back - but it came under fire when furious viewers deemed it 'inappropriate'. Despite the £11,000 ensemble causing hundreds of viewers to complain to Ofcom, the media regulator decided not to investigate. Ofcom said that while it recognised the dress 'had potential to offend some viewers during what is a family show' - the outfit 'would not have exceeded most viewers' expectations'. In 2019, another of Amanda's dresses on the show sparked nine Ofcom complaints. The judge wore for a sheer dress with spiderweb detailing over the chest, but it was branded 'inappropriate' by viewers, with nine viewers complaining about the look. However, Amanda appeared to see the funny side as she took to Instagram to share a joke about a water bottle sitting on the judges panel acting as a 'nipple cover'. The following night, she sparked more Ofcom complaints as she strutted her stuff in a gown by Lebanese designer Saiid Kobeisy. In another controversy, the regulator said the dress received 34 complaints relating to her dress. She has continued to show off her bold looks on the 2025 series of Britain's Got Talent and has provided she won't let the backlash change her style During an October 2020 episode, Amanda once again wowed in a plum Suzanne Neville dress with a lace corset top that showed off her toned legs. Of the 896 reported complaints made to Ofcom about the episode, 136 of these were about her dress, with Amanda sharing her 'baffled' reaction to the outrage. 'Just to say this dress got a tiny 136 complaints out of the 896 we apparently got that night,' she said on Instagram at the time. 'Surely there are more terrible and important things to write you agree? I'm baffled why it's still going on.' In 2020, after wearing a navy Celia Kritharioti off-the-shoulder dress with a V-neckline - more Ofcom complaints were made. Amanda was hit by 235 complaints but firmly hit back at the criticism in another impassioned Instagram post. She has continued to show off her bold fashion-forward looks on the 2025 series of Britain's Got Talent and has provided she won't let the backlash change her style.