Oh dear – it looks like Labour’s new non-dom policy is unravelling already. Everyone knows that Ed Balls did not abolish non-dom status while in government because he knew that people would scarper. So it would lead to less revenue, less money from the rich – and, ergo, a greater share of the burden to be paid by the poor. So it sounds progressive, but is actually regressive.
Balls now denies ever holding such a belief. But Mr S has come across an interview he gave to BBC Radio Leeds just 13 weeks ago:-
Q: 'Would you close that loophole of non-dom status so that we can have these people taxed properly?
Ed Balls: 'I think that it is important that you make sure the non-dom rules work in a fair way.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/33b44/33b44f1966e79a8bbc533866eeb159e672891b43" alt=""
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in