'Britain has gone to hell': Norwegian shipping tycoon who is one of Britain's richest men says he's moving his businesses out of London after Labour's non-dom tax raid
The UK's ninth richest billionaire John Fredriksen has moved his business out of London following Labour's controversial non-dom tax raid.
The Norwegian-born shipping tycoon said 'Britain had gone to hell' after it emerged he had closed the Sloane Square headquarters of one of his private businesses -Seatankers Management.
It is the latest worrying sign of the huge exodus of wealth from the capital and comes after the UK suffered its biggest ever fall in billionaires on record.
The Labour Government abolished the non-dom tax status in April, which is where UK residents whose permanent home or domicile for tax purposes is outside the country.
Mr Fredriksen, 81, who has an estimated wealth of around £13.7 billion, has been critical of Britain's poor economic prospects.
He is now said to be spending most of his time running his business empire from the United Arab Emirates.
Mr Fredriksen told Norwegian title E24 at a shipping event in Oslo earlier this month: 'It's starting to remind me more and more of Norway.
'Britain has gone to hell, like Norway.'
He added: 'The entire Western world is on its way down.'
'People should get up and work even more, and go to the office instead of having a home office.'
The oil tanker magnate, who owns one of London's most prestigious private homes in Chelsea, left Norway in 1978.
He first got into oil trading in the 1960s in Beirut, before buying his first tankers in the 1970s.
Mr Fredriksen made his fortune during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, and in 2001 bought up the Grade II listed riverside Chelsea mansion for £37million.
Then in 2004, he reportedly turned down former Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich's £100million offer for the house.
It is now estimated to be worth a whopping £250million.
Last month, it was revealed that the UK has suffered the biggest fall in billionaires on record.
The number dropped to 156 this year from 165 in 2024, representing the sharpest decline in the Sunday Times Rich List's 37-year-history.
It came after the Autumn Budget last year included several controversial tax changes.
Since April, employers have had to start paying higher National Insurance contributions for their staff.
Rachel Reeves, backed by Sir Keir Starmer, also made changes to capital gains tax and inheritance tax.
'Our billionaire count is down and the combined wealth of those who feature in our research is falling,' Robert Watts, compiler of the Rich List, said when it was published last month.
'We are also finding fewer of the world's super rich are coming to live in the UK.'
He said he was also 'struck by the strength of criticism for Rachel Reeves's Treasury' when speaking to wealthy individuals for the publication.
Mr Watts said: 'We expected the abolition of non-dom status would anger affluent people from overseas.
'But homegrown young tech entrepreneurs and those running centuries-old family firms are also warning of serious consequences to a range of tax changes unveiled in last October's budget.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
27 minutes ago
- The Sun
Pro-Palestine protester dressed as Holocaust victim goes unchallenged by Met cops — amid claims of two-tier policing
A PROTESTER dressed as a Holocaust victim goes unchallenged by Met cops — amid claims of two-tier policing. Maria Gallastegui sparked outrage by wearing a concentration camp-style uniform - swapping the yellow star for an Islamic symbol - at a Westminster demo. 2 2 Jewish leaders and MPs hit out at the Met, claiming officers warned men waving Israeli flags they could breach the peace but ignored Ms Gallastegui's stunt. It comes after a man was prosecuted for burning a Koran in London, fuelling claims of 'double standards' in policing. Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick said: 'We appear to have a two-tier blasphemy law in this country, which protects Islam from offensive references but not others.' Labour Against Antisemitism also slammed the outfit for 'appropriating and distorting the Holocaust.' The group said it 'was clearly designed to cause distress'. They have written to Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley demanding action over the protest outside Parliament. Ms Gallastegui, 66, defended herself, saying: 'This is a history lesson for now, and by no means is it meant to be anti-Semitic. Changing the symbols of the yellow star to the crescent and star is simply to illustrate that point.'
Daily Mail
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Celebrity enclave at war after 'Taylor Swift tax' threatens to wipe out holiday homes of the wealthy
Swifties, sun-seekers, and second-home millionaires — brace yourselves. Rhode Island just approved a controversial new real estate tax that's got wealthy seasonal residents fuming and threatening to pack up their beach chairs for good. Locals are calling it the ' Taylor Swift tax,' and yes — it could even hit the pop star's Watch Hill mansion. The proposed tax — which would impose fees that could soar into the six-figures for many — would apply to second homes worth $1million or more that aren't used for at least six months a year. Even Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy — a self-proclaimed Swiftie — joined the chorus of opposition, warning it could set off a dangerous trend among other Northeastern states. 'We don't like that tax,' Portnoy said. 'Now, I don't have any houses in Rhode Island, but I got some pretty close. I don't like those states getting the ideas.' Lawmakers say it's aimed at generating new revenue from properties often vacant for most of the year. Other famous celebrities who have real estate in Rhode Island and would get hit by the tax include Jay Leno, Conan O'Brien and Judge Judy Sheindlin. But critics argue it unfairly targets families and individuals who have spent decades summering in Rhode Island — and contribute to the economy without draining local resources. Local realtor and lifelong Watch Hill resident Geb Masterson said Rhode Island residents are so angry they're threatening to go elsewhere if the bill becomes law. 'These are people who put very little drain on Westerly and Watch Hill,' Masterson told DailyMail of two communities that will be hit hardest. 'It's just another way to go after the wealthy when the state's funds run dry... It's another nail in the coffin.' The Rhode Island House of Representatives recently greenlit the proposed $13.9 billion state budget that includes the sweeping new real estate tax, which Masterson says residents are furious over. On Wednesday, Rhode Island Gov. Daniel J. McKee put the bill in limbo temporarily, saying he will not sign nor veto the $14.3 billion state budget as it stands because 'it taxes people and raises fees unnecessarily.' 'At this moment in time there wasn't a need to raise taxes on anyone,' he said, not fully ruling out future taxes on part-time residents. Gov. McKee's move isn't the same as a veto and the bill can move forward if revised to his liking. If the budget had been vetoed, the General Assembly would have to go back into session to override the veto, or make amendments to the budget. 'This won't affect just the wealthy, everyone will be affected by this,' Masterson, the Watch Hill resident, said of the potential new tax. 'It's a lot of old families here and for years it was a sort of a quiet sleepy town, most people have been coming here for generations with their parents. 'It' sort of changed a little a little bit, new blood has been coming into the area, the Swifties, which is actually fantastic for our summer tourism industry, because they come to see Taylor's house then they stay the weekend.' Masterson says tourism industry workers will feel the burn if homeowners start to flee the area because of the big tax. 'There's not a lot of winter industry around here so when the summer crowd comes in it's supporting a lot of a lot of people,' he says. 'This will hurt them too if no one is here.' If a law does pass in the future, Swift will face her own six-figure tax on her $17 million Watch Hill estate. Swift has famously owned the mansion in the upmarket beach town since 2013 and spends July 4th there nearly every year. Under the guise of helping Rhode Island's affordability crisis, those who have 'non-primary residences valued over $1 million' will be taxed under the proposal. Overall, homeowners would face an annual surcharge of $2.50 per $500 of assessed value above the first $1 million — meaning a $3 million second home would see a $10,000 yearly fee. Swift and her beachfront estate neighbors would likely get taxed $100,000 and up based on the size of their mansions. The budget also proposes a 63 percent hike in the real estate conveyance tax, which sellers pay upon transferring property. The state says revenue from both tax hikes would go toward affordable housing projects, including the construction of low-income units and expansion of housing tax credits. Kerry Park, a senior vice president Rhode Island Association of Realtors, tells DailyMail that many people who have median priced second homes are going to get hit hard. 'We do have a lot of smaller homes that are near the ocean. Since the pandemic those little tiny places are a lot of money now and if they've been in the family for generations now they're going to have to come up with this annual tax which isn't easy for a lot of those people,' she said. Watch Hill realtor Larry Burns warns the economic backlash of the tax will be brutal. Burns specializes in coastal and luxury properties, and says the impact of the tax will trickle down to longtime residents who are not wealthy, and to local economies. 'Rhode Island economy for the most part is driven by tourism, especially in all in New England especially coastal state like Rhode Island,' he told the Daily Mail. The beaches in Watch Hill are popular among residents who summer in the town 'And it's really going to discourage people from buying second homes here because of the added expense.' He continued: 'There's people like Taylor Swift — people will look at her and think, 'Well, she has so much money she'll never even notice an increase like this.' 'But it's not like the residents here have inexhaustible resources. '$100,000 here might be college education for the year for a kid, or two kids.' Burns added the tax could force many to part with cherished family homes. 'There's a lot of older folks or multigenerational properties where the siblings have inherited the property, and if you keep adding expenses people end up selling because they can't keep up with the cost,' he said. Local business owner James Nicholas, who is the fourth generation of his family to run St. Clair Annex, an ice cream shop down the hill from Swift's estate (yes, she's been in the shop and is lovely), put it best. 'As one of the people who run small businesses that benefit from from summer residents, I'm thinking of others like landscapers, lumber yards, contractors, pool companies who are are relying on these summer visitors,' he said. 'It's not the golden bullet that the people think it is that we're just gonna text rich people and nothing's gonna happen. There's downstream consequences. 'There's a stratum of society that can absorb that cost, but regular people, maybe they don't put an addition on the house, don't you know go to the local restaurants or they don't shop at the local shops as much, taxing them is short sighted thinking.' Whether the tax becomes law down the line remains uncertain, but Burns, the local realtor, says it could go either way.
Daily Mail
37 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
QUENTIN LETTS: Welcome back, PM. You didn't miss much, just a mutiny of MPs and a plot by Ange to depose you!
Good Heavens, it was Sir Keir Starmer! The Prime Minister swaggered into the Commons at 11.30am. First time for over a fortnight. He was lucky a clerk didn't ask to check his security pass. The Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, signalled subtle displeasure at Sir Keir's neglect of the House. He said MPs would be given more leeway in their questions, to allow them to catch up with the absentee. I hear that on Monday night Sir Lindsay summoned the Cabinet Secretary to his study to tear him off a strip over Sir Keir's scurvy attitude to parliamentary scrutiny. Kemi Badenoch could have said 'Welcome back, stranger, you didn't miss much – just a mutiny among your MPs, a poll saying you're now as popular as the clap and a plot by Angela Rayner to depose you'. Instead the Conservative leader, who is not excessively endowed in the humour department, came over all jabbery. She shouted that Sir Keir had 'evaded Prime Minister's question time for two weeks' and was now 'irrelevant'. Aiee, that was ill-judged. You do not have to be Kemi-sceptic to see that even our nasal plodder of a PM is more relevant than she at present. Mrs Badenoch paid for her rant. Sir Keir was able to gloat, no fewer than seven times, that his opponent was 'unserious'. Did she truly mean he should not attend G7 and Nato summits? Furthermore, should she ever become PM (a possibility he later declared not to exist), the head of Nato would need to hang a sign over her empty seat at the summit table saying 'gone to PMQs'. How the sycophants tinkled with laughter at that. Starmer was at his most patronising. The chamber was surprisingly unbusy. The Lib Dems were down to seven. Reform MPs were a total no-show. The Tories were sparse and one of them – Mark Pritchard from The Wrekin, Shropshire – was so rude about Mrs Badenoch that he might soon defect. Sir Keir's parliamentary private secretary, a shrewd lad, leaned forward and muttered something to the Prime Minister when Mr Pritchard was trumpeting. Sir Keir proceeded to baste Pritchard in warm treacle. The old bloviator loved that. More interesting than anything on the Opposition benches was the paucity of Labour bodies. Despite doughnutting behind ministers to make TV viewers think it was a big turn-out, there must have been barely a tenth of Labour's contingent on parade. This was evidence of two things: the size of the Starmer arch-loyalist faction and the much greater number of Labour MPs who are indifferent towards him. Theirs was an ominous absence. Once Mrs Badenoch had blurted out her 'evading PMQs' line, these Starmer loyalists rose one after another to hail the nasal knight's 'leadership' and to complain that Kemi's remarks were a disgrace. Such was the consistency of these contributions, it was obvious Labour's Whips were orchestrating them. You just get a Whip to send a job-hungry MP a text message saying 'Here's what to say'. Most of them oblige. It's sickeningly low-grade but it works. Those applying their suction nozzles to Sir Keir's posterior included: Gemmell (C Ayrshire), Ahmed (Glasgow SW), Bailey (Leyton), Macdonald (Norwich N), McDonald (Stockton N) and Slinger (Rugby) but for sheer, marvel-eyed sycophancy none quite matched a woman from West Bromwich called Coombes. Whenever the first ministerial shuffle happens it will be a surprise if these virtuosi are not rewarded for their heroic efforts. Two other things. First, is Sir Keir's eyesight giving him gyp? He seemed to have new spectacles – they were glinting in a way I had not seen before – and, as happens occasionally, he asked for his speech to be raised on a special platform which was placed atop the despatch box. This did not prevent him from misreading some of the words. And earlier we had another corker from Lucy Powell, the dazzlingly intellectual Leader of the Commons. In an effort to praise the military she managed to refer to our 'armed sauces'.
