this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
21 points (100.0% liked)

United Kingdom

5489 readers
287 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Chancellor to crack down on loophole under which partners do not pay employer national insurance

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ben14142@feddit.uk 7 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Solicitors and GPs aren’t necessarily the UK’s wealthy. Suggested wealth taxes by campaigners are targeted at those with assets over £10 million (i.e multimillionaires and billionaires). Not saying this tax won’t raise money, but I’m not sure why whenever taxes are raised it seems to more often be targeted at the workers and not the wealthy.

[–] scratchee@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Serious answer: the actually wealthy are too good at tax dodging, so taxing them is rarely effective, plus they can scare governments by threatening to fly their private jets to some other country if they were actually threatened with effective taxation.

I’ve heard it claimed that the only effective way to run a wealth tax is to do a single massive one off tax with no warning or lead time, that way the ~~cockroaches~~ wealthy can’t run and hide in the woodwork quickly enough.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Indeed. Unfortunately in the age of abundant air travel and being able to do basically everything online, including remaining in contact with people, it's not hard to just move out of the UK if you're super wealthy.

We absolutely can and should tax assets that can't be moved out of the UK, though, like land. A multi-millionaire can move all kinds of things out of the country, but they cannot take their land with them. Land value would of course go down or stagnate, but I don't personally see that as a bad thing.

That said, even if you took all billionaire wealth in the UK (while somehow simultaneously preventing a crash in the value of those assets), it'd last months. It wouldn't be a permanent solution. State spending is £1.2 trillion, a small amount of billionaires aren't going to plug the gap for long.

There's no simple solution to the financial situation this country is in.

E: I guess people don't want solutions, they just want someone who agrees with them.

[–] MoonManKipper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Ah - a sensible comment in a thread about a wealth tax 😁. Yes - wealth taxes do raise money if they’re on things that are hard to move - so land, property. Also death duties - add up the estate, take a percentage. Anything else is more trouble than it’s worth. Better to effective and enforced income and consumption taxes.

And no getting away from the fact that it doesn’t solve the problem - to do that most people will have to pay more tax, and government needs to get much more efficient.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)