Millionaires may exit UK in record numbers after non-dom tax shake-up
The United Kingdom may witness a significant departure of wealthy residents. Around 16,500 millionaires are expected to leave in 2025. This migration links to changes in tax and visa rules. The UK government's decision to alter non-domicile tax regime is a factor. Many affluent individuals are seeking opportunities elsewhere.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
The United Kingdom is expected to see a record outflow of wealthy residents in 2025, with 16,500 millionaires projected to leave the country. The migration is being linked to recent changes in tax and visa policies, according to the latest Henley Private Wealth Migration Report.The report estimates that these departing individuals collectively hold £66 billion in investable assets. The shift follows the UK government's decision to abolish the long-standing non-domicile (non-dom) tax regime in April and introduce a stricter residence-based tax system.'This unprecedented outflow follows an already record-breaking year in 2024, when 10,800 affluent residents departed in search of greener pastures — compounding the mounting capital drain that began with Brexit,' said Dr. Juerg Steffen, CEO of Henley & Partners, the firm behind the study.Before 2016, the UK typically gained more millionaires through migration than it lost. But this trend has reversed following two major policy moves: the closure of the Tier 1 investor visa in 2022 and the overhaul of non-dom tax rules in 2024. These changes, followed by Labour's proposed revisions to inheritance tax, have accelerated the exit.Under the new rules, wealthy foreigners who have lived in the UK for more than four years are subject to UK income and capital gains taxes on their global earnings. Their worldwide assets also fall under the UK's inheritance tax, which is charged at 40%.The migration report shows that the UK is projected to lose more high net worth individuals than China or Russia in 2025. While Britain remains attractive to some foreign investors, including Americans seeking to relocate, the inflows have not matched the rate of departures.Henley & Partners reported a 183% increase in the number of British nationals applying for residence or citizenship abroad through the firm in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period last year.Among the top destinations for departing UK millionaires are the United Arab Emirates, the United States, Italy, and Switzerland. The UAE is forecast to receive the highest net inflow of millionaires globally this year, with 9,800 expected arrivals.Prominent names reported to have left the UK include heiress Anne Beaufour, investor Max Gottschalk, JC Flowers' Tim Hanford, and boxing promoter Eddie Hearn. Steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal is also said to be considering relocation.Meanwhile, some EU countries such as France, Spain, and Germany are also facing similar trends, with expected net losses of high net worth individuals this year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Fire hazard: Funding the burning of fossil fuels will eventually leave bank money burnt
If you come home early from vacation and find robbers ransacking your house, you could call the police and try to stop the crime. But the true alpha move would be to help the robbers load your valuables onto their truck and then tell them which of your neighbours are also on holiday in exchange for a cut of their profits. Banks seem to be choosing the alpha option by abetting theft from themselves in backing new projects to extract and burn fossil fuels, thus stoking global warming that stunts economic growth and their own insurance and mortgage businesses. Of course, these financial companies do get a cut of the short-term profits from this environmental sabotage. And by abandoning the pretence of siding with the planet's future, they avoid political blowback from a US government that has declared war on it. But the long-term result will be a global economy trillions of dollars poorer and far less stable, impoverishing just about everyone, including banks. Also Read: ESG gaps: India Inc's approach to the climate crisis needs a hard reset The world's 65 biggest banks delivered $869.4 billion in finance to fossil-fuel companies last year, up $162.5 billion from 2023. Banks have funnelled $7.9 trillion in loans and underwriting to these polluting industries since the Paris climate accord took effect in 2016. This doesn't include any investments by banks' asset-management units, which amount to hundreds of billions of dollars more. Last year's funding surge reversed two years of decline and coincided with a turn of political sentiment against 'woke' environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations in business. Climate action drew some of the harshest attacks, with US President Donald Trump and other conservatives blaming climate activism for high energy prices. Such claims helped Trump win a second term. On his first day in office, he declared that his predecessor's climate concerns had created a 'national energy emergency" that hurt the finances of Americans. His prescription has been to attack any public or private activity meant to slow the burning of fossil fuels. Also Read: Trump's solar panel tariffs deal climate action a severe blow Banks caught the direction in which the wind was blowing and quickly changed tack. The biggest immediately quit the Net Zero Banking Alliance, a group that vows to help eliminate greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050. They still claim to have their own goals for curbing emissions, but they've apparently given up trying to make their actions match their words. To meet the Paris Agreement's rapidly fading stretch-goal of capping global heat at 1.5° Celsius above the pre-industrial average, energy financing should favour green projects over fossil fuels by a 4-to-1 ratio, according to BloombergNEF. In 2023, the latest data available, the ratio was just 0.89-to-1. Boosting fossil-fuel funding last year could not have moved that ratio in the desired direction. Meanwhile, the economic damage caused by a fast-heating planet keeps mounting. Global climate-related costs—including insured and uninsured losses, government relief spending and higher insurance premiums—have topped $18.5 trillion since January 2000, Bloomberg Intelligence (BI) estimated recently. The US alone accounted for $7.7 trillion of the damage, or 36% of its growth in GDP over that stretch. In just the 12 months through April, US climate-related costs totalled nearly $1 trillion, BI said, roughly matching bank financing for fossil fuels during that time. Also Read: David Fickling: How a simple valve can cut fossil fuel emissions but won't You might argue economic activity is economic activity, that building a house is basically the same as rebuilding a house, that government disaster relief is no different from any other flavour of government spending. But simply responding to disasters again and again is no way to grow an economy. Money spent on rebuilding houses, bridges and roads is money not spent on education, better infrastructure or other productivity-boosting measures. It steals growth from the future. A National Bureau of Economic Research paper last fall estimated that a planet hotter by 3° Celsius—its current trajectory—would have a GDP that's smaller by more than a third. A study last week from the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy found that a complete rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act's climate measures, something Trump and congressional Republicans have been working hard to do, would shave $1.1 trillion from US GDP alone over the next decade. It would also kill 22,800 Americans, take $160 billion from American incomes and cause the average home's energy bill to be $206 higher. Talk about an emergency. Given the political reality, it's understandable for US banks to speak softly about protecting the planet and their own future profits. Helping fossil fuels build an even bigger stick with which to beat them makes much less sense. ©Bloomberg The author is a Bloomberg Opinion editor and columnist covering climate change.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
UK may compel Google to change search rankings to ensure fair competition
Britain's competition regulator said it may force Google to rank businesses more fairly in search results, marking the first use of expanded powers to oversee the world's biggest tech companies. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is proposing to designate Alphabet-owned Google with 'strategic market status', it said on Tuesday, giving it more power to intervene in search services to increase innovation and economic growth. If confirmed in October, the designation could compel Google to enhance transparency for publishers, simplify access to rival search services and facilitate data portability for competitors. CMA Chief Executive Sarah Cardell said Google, which accounts for more than 90% of search queries in Britain, had delivered tremendous benefits but the regulator had found ways to make markets more competitive and innovative. 'These targeted and proportionate actions would give UK businesses and consumers more choice and control over how they interact with Google's search services – as well as unlocking greater opportunities for innovation across the UK tech sector and broader economy,' she said. Millions of Britons relied on Google as a gateway to the internet and more than 200,000 businesses depended on Google search advertising to reach their customers, the regulator said. The CMA, which gained global prominence when Britain left the European Union, aims to use its expanded power to rein in the power of tech giants such as Google, Apple, Meta and Microsoft without stifling investment or growth. The CMA's targeted approach contrasts with the EU's broader enforcement of digital regulations, as Britain seeks to balance curbing the dominance of tech giants with fostering economic growth post-Brexit. Cardell said the CMA had set out a roadmap of changes the company could make ahead of a final decision in October. Google said on Tuesday that the CMA's SMS designation did not imply anti-competitive behaviours, but that its announcement presented clear challenges to critical areas of its business in Britain. 'We're concerned that the scope of the CMA's considerations remains broad and unfocused, with a range of interventions being considered before any evidence has been provided,' said Oliver Bethell, Google's senior director for competition. The CMA said it planned further action to address more complex issues, starting in 2026, such as concerns about Google's treatment of rival specialised search firms and transparency and control in search advertising. The regulator's second investigation under its new powers into mobile operating systems also targets Google, as well as Apple. It could see the company receive another designation focused on its Android operating system. Google has been subject to increasing regulatory scrutiny in the United States and the European Union, spanning search, advertising, AI, and digital platform practices. Over the past year it was found to have monopolised search and online ads in two major U.S. rulings, and it was charged in March by the European Commission with breaching landmark EU digital rules.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Trump's CFPB rollback has cost Americans $18 billion, consumer groups say
Live Events President Donald Trump's rapid pullback of the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has cost Americans at least $18 billion in higher fees and lost compensation for consumers allegedly cheated by major companies, according to an analysis released Tuesday by two increased consumer costs from the CFPB's rollback of regulations on bank fees, wholesale dismissal of cases against banks and other lenders and the apparent failure to disburse funds intended for harmed borrowers run counter to Trump's campaign pledges to ease the cost of living, according to the Student Borrower Protection Center and the Consumer Federation of America Representatives for the White House and CFPB did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside regular business Trump took control of the CFPB in February, calling for its elimination, administration officials have sought to reduce the workforce by about 90% and sharply curtail its industry officials accuse the agency and its former leadership of exceeding their legal powers, burdening free enterprise and engaging in politicized enforcement of consumer in a statement on Tuesday, the two organizations listed actions Trump's team had taken that they said shifted costs onto former President Joe Biden, the agency had sought to cap credit card late fees at $8 and overdraft fees at $5. The Trump administration's move to end those policies should together cost consumers $15 billion a year, according to the dismissal of 22 enforcement cases that were pending when Biden left office in January -- including actions against JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Capital One -- involved more than $3 billion in alleged harm to CFPB has also scrapped or revised settlements it had already concluded with Toyota and a payments processor, meaning about $50 million in redress payments will never be made, the statement said.
