The non-domicile rule was established by William Pitt the Younger in the late 18th century and allowed many of Britain’s richest permanent residents to avoid paying tax in the UK on their worldwide income. Non-domiciles pay UK income tax and capital gains tax on their UK sources of income and gains, and whatever income generated overseas they choose to remit to the UK. By contrast, UK domiciles have to pay tax on all of their income and gains, wherever in the world they are made – Britain or overseas. Proponents of overturning the rule argue that it has been wide open to abuse and offends the moral basis of taxation. Opponents argue that ending the rule will discourage foreign investment and that some non-doms pay as much as £132,000 per year in taxes.
54% Yes |
46% No |
54% Yes |
33% No |
13% No, this would discourage foreign investment in the UK |
See how support for each position on “Non-Domicile Rule” has changed over time for 195k UK voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Non-Domicile Rule” has changed over time for 195k UK voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from UK users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9L4VP4X1mo1MO
Yes, I think people should only earn money where they currently reside and work - and thus only pay taxes where they live.
@9BYZSK512mos12MO
Taxes should be abolished.
@9BLQGK31yr1Y
Depends on if they are paying tax in another country
@9B84XHJ1yr1Y
We need stronger unions.
@99QYDG81yr1Y
Setting up companies abroad and operating them in the UK should be discouraged and tax loopholes closed
@98W4KWT1yr1Y
Yes but they should pay a higher tax rate
Explore other topics that are important to UK voters.