June 19, 2025 • 14 mins
It’s no secret the Labour government’s policy to tax the UK’s wealthiest as part of its effort to fix a budget crisis left by the Conservatives has caused Prime Minister Keir Starmer some headaches. The biggest exodus of wealth in the UK’s recent history appears to be underway, and the data shows the departure is likely to be a drain on the economy. But is it enough for Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves to change course? And should she?
Bloomberg reporter Benjamin Stupples joins host Allegra Stratton to discuss.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio News. Welcome to in the City.
Each week we unpack a story that's crucial to the
world's financial capitals. I'm at alegra Stratton. So okay, we
(00:25):
know that it's a big news week, but interestingly, uncertainty
in the Middle East has not yet had a huge
effect on the markets. We also are not unaware promise
you that there's been a G seven and out of
that the UK did get some progress on its trade
agreement with the US. But even so, what has got
many people talking in the city is what an earth
(00:48):
may or may not be happening to the Chancellor's crackdown
on non doms. This week we returned to that decision
that Rachel Reeves made to essentially end the non dom status.
There are rooms that she may be about to do
a U turn.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Welcome to the City of London.
Speaker 1 (01:06):
The City, the City of London. We leave mine a
gap between the and the financial heart of the country.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
The City, the City.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Welcome to in the City. Stand clear of the doors. Pease. Okay,
So look, some news outlets are reporting Rachel Roofs could
reverse a decision to charge inheritance tax on the overseas
assets of non doms. We're going to get into how
substantiated those claims are in our conversation shortly, but before that,
(01:45):
let's have a quick look at the impact of the policy.
Our latest reporting shows that the exodus of non doms
could lead to a net drain on the UK economy,
with estimates suggesting we could lose thousands of jobs and
up to twelve point two billion over the coming four years. Now,
the journalist behind that is Ben Stupples and he joins
us in the London studio. Ben covers the world of
(02:08):
ultra wealthy for Bloomberg News in London. Ben Hi, Hi.
All right, Ben, Before we get onto whether or not
your sources believe that there is this U turn coming
on the non don status, quickly, just give us a
sense of how much of an impact it's had.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
Yeah, thanks, sir legre. It certainly had an impact, and
let's just unpack that for a second. Being a data business,
we sort of tried to take a data driven approach
to this. So what we looked at was, in the end,
thanks to my colleague Max Harlow, very talented data guy
in our newsroom, we analyze five million filings in Companies house.
That's a pretty comprehensive data set. And what the question
(02:48):
we asked within that was, okay, there are certain filings
you have to make if you are a director business
leader in the UK, if you are going to live
somewhere else. So we searched for that filing and we
found that year on year, April twenty twenty five, the
filings for that month were about seventy five percent higher
than a year before. Now why is that important? That month?
(03:09):
The non norm system ended. The concept of non dom
ceased to exist from early April. So what we can
see here, maybe for the first time, is a definitive signaling,
an indication that not all is well with Britain's what
I guess we could term billionaire economy. And we hadn't
had that before. Now why haven't we had that? The
(03:31):
way nondonms have to disclose, the way that they have
the status and all that stuff, it's not like a
normal tax payer. There's a bit of a lag in
the time that HMRC, the UK Tax Authority, collects and
publishes the data for that. So actually HMRC, on the
back of US publishing a big story last week, said
that they will put out the final numbers out in
twenty twenty seven. So in the meantime we're sort of
(03:53):
stuck in this sort of a bit of a guessing
game and we're just doing our very best to try
and use the data that exists right now to try
and have a sense of is this really working from Britain.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
So, Ben, do you from the sources you have in
the Treasury, do you think that the Financial Times that
first reported there was a U turn coming on this
end to the non dome status or certainly you know
substantial tweaks do you think that that's incorrect or do
you think something's afoot?
Speaker 2 (04:20):
I can certainly understand why this might be on a
Racha Reaver's desk in the Treasury. Why because first and
foremost this is the topic causing the biggest heartburn, is
what the Financial Times reported. Actually that's the word they use, heartburn, heartsache.
It is this is the biggest problem for the non
dome changes. Why is that? It is because we previously
(04:42):
we're actually quite deliberate in saying to nondomes we're only
going to text you on what's happening in the UK.
Create a business here, you pay tax on that. Everything
else that's overseas shares in your holding company. Let's say
you're an Indian steel tycoon or a European tech entrepreneur.
Don't worry about that stuff. Just worry about what's getting
on in the UK. If you live here long enough
fifteen years, yeah, you'll eventually pay full UK tax on that.
(05:04):
But what raych Reeves has done is go after from
pretty much. Instead of fifteen years, we now have four years, right,
so that's a big deal. We've slashed the time that
people now exposed UK tax and the overseas assets, and
so it was the biggest issue and it was raising
only for about five hundred million according to Office for
Budget Responsibilities of Forecasts, out of an overall package that
(05:24):
was meant to raise more than thirty billion. Now let's
think about this from a sort of pragmatic power politically.
You know, how does this look in the treasury and
beyond When you're also hiking taxes for inheritance tax for
British farmers, you're also doing it for UK business entrepreneurs. Right,
so we've also hiked you know, roch to Reeves said
(05:46):
those are the broadest shoulders must bear the brunt of
all this business owners are getting a massive whack on
inheritance tax, So we don't right now, we don't know
for sure if this is going to come down the line,
you know. Basically this is all what we can define
it now is I guess speculation ahead of the next budget,
which will be based on previous years October November time,
(06:07):
So that's the drum of speculation is already starting over
what was announced only months ago, right and just being
enacted into law. And this is clear. This is this
is actual legislation. So we'd need another Act of Parliament too,
as far as far as I understan it, we need
another Act of Parliament to amend all these and to
make any other big wholesale changes.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
The reason why this is a hair that's convincing to
have running is that there is a now a recent
history of U turns, and so it feels completely conceivable
that if evidence comes in that it's backfiring, that she
would want to reverse track. But you're also right that
she's also got pressure from her left in the Labor Party,
(06:49):
given what they're doing with farmers and so on, to
keep up the sort of parity. We can't know now,
and we won't know now what they will end up doing,
But I wonder whether it's you can give us insight
into whether it would even help if she were to
do this. I mean, what I find interesting about your
reporting are the analysts who speak to who who say, look,
there's a trust issue here now, so say they did
(07:11):
reverse on this. What's to say, given everything any intelligent
person is reading about the state of the public finances,
what's to say, yes, she gives non doms a reprieve now,
but what about in another year when things are sticky,
perhaps even harder fiscally.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
You're completely right doing. You asked me what my sources
have said in the back of this. We did survey
a lot of private wealth sources yesterday, asking hey, did
you see this coming? A lot of them said it
frankly bent. The horse has already bolted, to quote one source,
If Rachel Reeves does this now, it doesn't even matter. Really, Yeah,
it's a big issue. But actually, what we've had here
is it's not a single decision that made non doms go.
(07:49):
Let's just rewind the tape a little bit. It wasn't
actually the labor who came out with these moves in
the first place. It was the Tories in March twenty
twenty four, and then richids soon at Courts the election,
and then we get Labor saying you know, we're going
to do that, and we're going to go even further.
So that was in July. So I believe it's in
the build up to July with Labor winning the election,
and then after a lot of non doms went okay,
(08:10):
I was thinking of going, but now I'm definitely going
to go. And then we had rach Reeves standing up
at the budget saying I'm doing this. So that was
almost like a triple whammy. It wasn't like sort of
like a one stop hit, right, a sort of a
hit and run legislative sort of move, a.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
Systematic ratcheting up of pressure on this group.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Yeah, and then the broader context here is a lot
of non dums were already settled even before that. Why
because you know things about Brexit and the fallout of that.
You think about We've had half a dozen prime ministers
within the past decade, So Britain's traditionally attracted the global elite.
Why because of the political and economic and legal stability.
(08:48):
They always come up when he talked ultra and it
worths about why they love London, why they love living
in Britain. We've actually pulled the rug from under their
feet for those three reasons really over the last decade.
And if Rachel reeves to bring it full circle, if
ate to Reeve's and says, actually, I'm going to scrap
all that inheritance tax stuff, the thing that I was
really making a big song and dance over for nondoms,
We're not going to do it now. It actually furthers
that narrative that you can't really trust Britain now. You're
(09:11):
not really economically and fiscally secure here.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Yeah, you've got sort of a double vulnerability for her. One,
it's your kind of lack of clarity and conviction in
what she believes. And then secondly, you know, the direction
of travel is that there's a hole in the public
finances rather than don't worry the public finances are fixed.
But just looking at the other jurisdictions that have really
aggressively been pursuing the British ultra ultra high net worth individuals,
(09:38):
as we say, rather than the super rich, which used
to be the phrase a few years ago. And you've
got Italy and cities like Milan, You've got Dubai. You've
got Trump too, with his trunk cards or his golden
visas trying to entice the rich to America with you know,
the possibility becoming a US citizen quite easily. How much
of these other offers much more attractive than the environment
(10:02):
in the UK.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Now, Italy is a really good example. Actually, this is
a sort of a policy for them that's actually it's
run through as far as I understand it, it's run
almost through like a sort of central government hub. So
it's very systematic and it's very consistent. You don't have
the language in Milan. You do have to speak Italian
all of the time, but I would say it's the
closest sort of like for like, And they've got a
more attractive regime now that's actually now fifteen years, which
(10:25):
is what we previously had for a nonin regime. But
now if you're in Italy you've got fifteen years and
in the UK it's four. I mean, that's a pretty
if you're looking at a spreadsheet, it sort of makes sense,
and hey, life in Italy isn't that bad, and that
this is a crucial thing as well. You can get
around if you go the Milan Malplins if you've ever
been there in some holiday as Allegra, you can get
around pretty easily, you know, and you can get to
(10:46):
London as well.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
What are you saying about London's public exactly? Yeah, and
their inheritance tax regime is much more generous, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Yeah, that's a crucial one, Allegra.
Speaker 1 (10:56):
And I think that from the people that we have
heard from on in the city in the sort of
nine to twelve months, that this has been a particular
acute problem. It is that inheritance tax aspect that has
completely freaked out a generation of people who for whom
it is very pertinent.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Yes, in Italy has been very good on that. And
even if you end up living in Italy for let's
say twenty to thirty years, you set it down, you
have your grand kids there, Well, are you exposed to
forty percent?
Speaker 1 (11:21):
No? Not.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
I think it's about four percent top of my head,
so massively difference. And just other jurisdiction I'd highlight jurisdictions.
I would say Abu Dabby's done a very good job
to buy is pretty strong that in terms of marketing themselves,
Abi Dabi has a central government hub agency that actually
is really I would say ruling out of the red
carpet globally, but I would say they're not blind to
(11:44):
the fact that, you know, London's a pretty active market
for movements.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
So Ben just to kind of try and tie this
all together and we do try it on in the
city to be somewhat positive. If you were the Chancellor
and you're looking at the numbers that you set out
very clearly at the beginning of this odd what would
be the smart thing to do to say, Look, I've
obviously damaged trust, but I really need you guys to stay.
Guys and girls to stay. You know, you are GDP
(12:09):
critical to what I'm trying to do. What would you
suggest she do with some credibility to actually keep them
in London.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
The big elephant in the room is the fact that
we scrapped our Golden visa regime in twenty twenty two
because of we were keen at the time to clean
out any Russian money that we didn't think should be here. Now,
that was a big deal and we haven't replaced it
since then. And you mentioned earlier that US President Donald
Trump is making a big song and dance about Yeah,
(12:40):
the Trump card, the US Golden visa, bring it in.
You know, I'd be looking at that if I was
both Racheries and Kirstarmer for that matter. It's interesting we
did report that they were looking at some sort of
strategic investor visa and that got a lot of tongues wagging,
not just in the know private wealth community, but beyond that.
You know, that's interesting. I think it's politically defendable for
Starle and Reeves. You know, they came to powers saying
(13:02):
they are keen for growth, that's their number one priority. Well,
if you want someone from overseas to invest in Britain's infrastructure,
which you know there's a broader economic benefit for that,
right from the heighth of the low classes, that's defendable,
I would say, and more possible than I would say
doing anything wholesale change with the non dom stuff, where
they'vehin their colors to the mask, they've said we're going
(13:24):
to do this, and if they do anything to change it,
then it speaks to you can't trust labor with the economy,
you can't trust labor with all of you know, the
non domb stuff, and it speaks to the broader issues
that made non domsun settled in the first place.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
Ben, that's a brilliant place to leave it. Thank you
so much and good luck with your reporting. Thank you,
thanks for listening to this week's In the City from Bloomberg.
This episode was hosted by me alegra Stratton. In the
City is produced by Summersadi and Moses and with sound
designed by Blake. Maple's Brendan Francis new is our executive producer.
(14:02):
Special thanks to Ben Stupples. Please subscribe, rate, and review
wherever you listen to podcasts.
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio News. Welcome to in the City.
Each week we unpack a story that's crucial to the
world's financial capitals. I'm at alegra Stratton. So okay, we
(00:25):
know that it's a big news week, but interestingly, uncertainty
in the Middle East has not yet had a huge
effect on the markets. We also are not unaware promise
you that there's been a G seven and out of
that the UK did get some progress on its trade
agreement with the US. But even so, what has got
many people talking in the city is what an earth
(00:48):
may or may not be happening to the Chancellor's crackdown
on non doms. This week we returned to that decision
that Rachel Reeves made to essentially end the non dom status.
There are rooms that she may be about to do
a U turn.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Welcome to the City of London.
Speaker 1 (01:06):
The City, the City of London. We leave mine a
gap between the and the financial heart of the country.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
The City, the City.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Welcome to in the City. Stand clear of the doors. Pease. Okay,
So look, some news outlets are reporting Rachel Roofs could
reverse a decision to charge inheritance tax on the overseas
assets of non doms. We're going to get into how
substantiated those claims are in our conversation shortly, but before that,
(01:45):
let's have a quick look at the impact of the policy.
Our latest reporting shows that the exodus of non doms
could lead to a net drain on the UK economy,
with estimates suggesting we could lose thousands of jobs and
up to twelve point two billion over the coming four years. Now,
the journalist behind that is Ben Stupples and he joins
us in the London studio. Ben covers the world of
(02:08):
ultra wealthy for Bloomberg News in London. Ben Hi, Hi.
All right, Ben, Before we get onto whether or not
your sources believe that there is this U turn coming
on the non don status, quickly, just give us a
sense of how much of an impact it's had.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
Yeah, thanks, sir legre. It certainly had an impact, and
let's just unpack that for a second. Being a data business,
we sort of tried to take a data driven approach
to this. So what we looked at was, in the end,
thanks to my colleague Max Harlow, very talented data guy
in our newsroom, we analyze five million filings in Companies house.
That's a pretty comprehensive data set. And what the question
(02:48):
we asked within that was, okay, there are certain filings
you have to make if you are a director business
leader in the UK, if you are going to live
somewhere else. So we searched for that filing and we
found that year on year, April twenty twenty five, the
filings for that month were about seventy five percent higher
than a year before. Now why is that important? That month?
(03:09):
The non norm system ended. The concept of non dom
ceased to exist from early April. So what we can
see here, maybe for the first time, is a definitive signaling,
an indication that not all is well with Britain's what
I guess we could term billionaire economy. And we hadn't
had that before. Now why haven't we had that? The
(03:31):
way nondonms have to disclose, the way that they have
the status and all that stuff, it's not like a
normal tax payer. There's a bit of a lag in
the time that HMRC, the UK Tax Authority, collects and
publishes the data for that. So actually HMRC, on the
back of US publishing a big story last week, said
that they will put out the final numbers out in
twenty twenty seven. So in the meantime we're sort of
(03:53):
stuck in this sort of a bit of a guessing
game and we're just doing our very best to try
and use the data that exists right now to try
and have a sense of is this really working from Britain.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
So, Ben, do you from the sources you have in
the Treasury, do you think that the Financial Times that
first reported there was a U turn coming on this
end to the non dome status or certainly you know
substantial tweaks do you think that that's incorrect or do
you think something's afoot?
Speaker 2 (04:20):
I can certainly understand why this might be on a
Racha Reaver's desk in the Treasury. Why because first and
foremost this is the topic causing the biggest heartburn, is
what the Financial Times reported. Actually that's the word they use, heartburn, heartsache.
It is this is the biggest problem for the non
dome changes. Why is that? It is because we previously
(04:42):
we're actually quite deliberate in saying to nondomes we're only
going to text you on what's happening in the UK.
Create a business here, you pay tax on that. Everything
else that's overseas shares in your holding company. Let's say
you're an Indian steel tycoon or a European tech entrepreneur.
Don't worry about that stuff. Just worry about what's getting
on in the UK. If you live here long enough
fifteen years, yeah, you'll eventually pay full UK tax on that.
(05:04):
But what raych Reeves has done is go after from
pretty much. Instead of fifteen years, we now have four years, right,
so that's a big deal. We've slashed the time that
people now exposed UK tax and the overseas assets, and
so it was the biggest issue and it was raising
only for about five hundred million according to Office for
Budget Responsibilities of Forecasts, out of an overall package that
(05:24):
was meant to raise more than thirty billion. Now let's
think about this from a sort of pragmatic power politically.
You know, how does this look in the treasury and
beyond When you're also hiking taxes for inheritance tax for
British farmers, you're also doing it for UK business entrepreneurs. Right,
so we've also hiked you know, roch to Reeves said
(05:46):
those are the broadest shoulders must bear the brunt of
all this business owners are getting a massive whack on
inheritance tax, So we don't right now, we don't know
for sure if this is going to come down the line,
you know. Basically this is all what we can define
it now is I guess speculation ahead of the next budget,
which will be based on previous years October November time,
(06:07):
So that's the drum of speculation is already starting over
what was announced only months ago, right and just being
enacted into law. And this is clear. This is this
is actual legislation. So we'd need another Act of Parliament too,
as far as far as I understan it, we need
another Act of Parliament to amend all these and to
make any other big wholesale changes.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
The reason why this is a hair that's convincing to
have running is that there is a now a recent
history of U turns, and so it feels completely conceivable
that if evidence comes in that it's backfiring, that she
would want to reverse track. But you're also right that
she's also got pressure from her left in the Labor Party,
(06:49):
given what they're doing with farmers and so on, to
keep up the sort of parity. We can't know now,
and we won't know now what they will end up doing,
But I wonder whether it's you can give us insight
into whether it would even help if she were to
do this. I mean, what I find interesting about your
reporting are the analysts who speak to who who say, look,
there's a trust issue here now, so say they did
(07:11):
reverse on this. What's to say, given everything any intelligent
person is reading about the state of the public finances,
what's to say, yes, she gives non doms a reprieve now,
but what about in another year when things are sticky,
perhaps even harder fiscally.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
You're completely right doing. You asked me what my sources
have said in the back of this. We did survey
a lot of private wealth sources yesterday, asking hey, did
you see this coming? A lot of them said it
frankly bent. The horse has already bolted, to quote one source,
If Rachel Reeves does this now, it doesn't even matter. Really, Yeah,
it's a big issue. But actually, what we've had here
is it's not a single decision that made non doms go.
(07:49):
Let's just rewind the tape a little bit. It wasn't
actually the labor who came out with these moves in
the first place. It was the Tories in March twenty
twenty four, and then richids soon at Courts the election,
and then we get Labor saying you know, we're going
to do that, and we're going to go even further.
So that was in July. So I believe it's in
the build up to July with Labor winning the election,
and then after a lot of non doms went okay,
(08:10):
I was thinking of going, but now I'm definitely going
to go. And then we had rach Reeves standing up
at the budget saying I'm doing this. So that was
almost like a triple whammy. It wasn't like sort of
like a one stop hit, right, a sort of a
hit and run legislative sort of move, a.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
Systematic ratcheting up of pressure on this group.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Yeah, and then the broader context here is a lot
of non dums were already settled even before that. Why
because you know things about Brexit and the fallout of that.
You think about We've had half a dozen prime ministers
within the past decade, So Britain's traditionally attracted the global elite.
Why because of the political and economic and legal stability.
(08:48):
They always come up when he talked ultra and it
worths about why they love London, why they love living
in Britain. We've actually pulled the rug from under their
feet for those three reasons really over the last decade.
And if Rachel reeves to bring it full circle, if
ate to Reeve's and says, actually, I'm going to scrap
all that inheritance tax stuff, the thing that I was
really making a big song and dance over for nondoms,
We're not going to do it now. It actually furthers
that narrative that you can't really trust Britain now. You're
(09:11):
not really economically and fiscally secure here.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Yeah, you've got sort of a double vulnerability for her. One,
it's your kind of lack of clarity and conviction in
what she believes. And then secondly, you know, the direction
of travel is that there's a hole in the public
finances rather than don't worry the public finances are fixed.
But just looking at the other jurisdictions that have really
aggressively been pursuing the British ultra ultra high net worth individuals,
(09:38):
as we say, rather than the super rich, which used
to be the phrase a few years ago. And you've
got Italy and cities like Milan, You've got Dubai. You've
got Trump too, with his trunk cards or his golden
visas trying to entice the rich to America with you know,
the possibility becoming a US citizen quite easily. How much
of these other offers much more attractive than the environment
(10:02):
in the UK.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Now, Italy is a really good example. Actually, this is
a sort of a policy for them that's actually it's
run through as far as I understand it, it's run
almost through like a sort of central government hub. So
it's very systematic and it's very consistent. You don't have
the language in Milan. You do have to speak Italian
all of the time, but I would say it's the
closest sort of like for like, And they've got a
more attractive regime now that's actually now fifteen years, which
(10:25):
is what we previously had for a nonin regime. But
now if you're in Italy you've got fifteen years and
in the UK it's four. I mean, that's a pretty
if you're looking at a spreadsheet, it sort of makes sense,
and hey, life in Italy isn't that bad, and that
this is a crucial thing as well. You can get
around if you go the Milan Malplins if you've ever
been there in some holiday as Allegra, you can get
around pretty easily, you know, and you can get to
(10:46):
London as well.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
What are you saying about London's public exactly? Yeah, and
their inheritance tax regime is much more generous, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Yeah, that's a crucial one, Allegra.
Speaker 1 (10:56):
And I think that from the people that we have
heard from on in the city in the sort of
nine to twelve months, that this has been a particular
acute problem. It is that inheritance tax aspect that has
completely freaked out a generation of people who for whom
it is very pertinent.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Yes, in Italy has been very good on that. And
even if you end up living in Italy for let's
say twenty to thirty years, you set it down, you
have your grand kids there, Well, are you exposed to
forty percent?
Speaker 1 (11:21):
No? Not.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
I think it's about four percent top of my head,
so massively difference. And just other jurisdiction I'd highlight jurisdictions.
I would say Abu Dabby's done a very good job
to buy is pretty strong that in terms of marketing themselves,
Abi Dabi has a central government hub agency that actually
is really I would say ruling out of the red
carpet globally, but I would say they're not blind to
(11:44):
the fact that, you know, London's a pretty active market
for movements.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
So Ben just to kind of try and tie this
all together and we do try it on in the
city to be somewhat positive. If you were the Chancellor
and you're looking at the numbers that you set out
very clearly at the beginning of this odd what would
be the smart thing to do to say, Look, I've
obviously damaged trust, but I really need you guys to stay.
Guys and girls to stay. You know, you are GDP
(12:09):
critical to what I'm trying to do. What would you
suggest she do with some credibility to actually keep them
in London.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
The big elephant in the room is the fact that
we scrapped our Golden visa regime in twenty twenty two
because of we were keen at the time to clean
out any Russian money that we didn't think should be here. Now,
that was a big deal and we haven't replaced it
since then. And you mentioned earlier that US President Donald
Trump is making a big song and dance about Yeah,
(12:40):
the Trump card, the US Golden visa, bring it in.
You know, I'd be looking at that if I was
both Racheries and Kirstarmer for that matter. It's interesting we
did report that they were looking at some sort of
strategic investor visa and that got a lot of tongues wagging,
not just in the know private wealth community, but beyond that.
You know, that's interesting. I think it's politically defendable for
Starle and Reeves. You know, they came to powers saying
(13:02):
they are keen for growth, that's their number one priority. Well,
if you want someone from overseas to invest in Britain's infrastructure,
which you know there's a broader economic benefit for that,
right from the heighth of the low classes, that's defendable,
I would say, and more possible than I would say
doing anything wholesale change with the non dom stuff, where
they'vehin their colors to the mask, they've said we're going
(13:24):
to do this, and if they do anything to change it,
then it speaks to you can't trust labor with the economy,
you can't trust labor with all of you know, the
non domb stuff, and it speaks to the broader issues
that made non domsun settled in the first place.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
Ben, that's a brilliant place to leave it. Thank you
so much and good luck with your reporting. Thank you,
thanks for listening to this week's In the City from Bloomberg.
This episode was hosted by me alegra Stratton. In the
City is produced by Summersadi and Moses and with sound
designed by Blake. Maple's Brendan Francis new is our executive producer.
(14:02):
Special thanks to Ben Stupples. Please subscribe, rate, and review
wherever you listen to podcasts.
Host
Francine Lacqua
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.