Goodness - golden boy Sunak now less popular than Starmer!

I think her position is to do with us, as the wife of a prominent minister will have some influence on him, and even his not he no doubts benefits from her money. You can be certain he won't be lobbying to close this particular tax loophole from which he directly benefits.

It’s perfectly legal but not very diplomatic like many of the current day utterances by wealthy politicians. Loopholes like this should be closed for everyone. The Labour Party has their fair share of hidden assets too which of course Keir is not mentioning. I can quite understand the Chancellor’s wife not wanting to lose the citizenship of her birth country-I know I wouldn’t ! But she is a very wealthy woman, perhaps she should pay for the privilege of living here? I think that WE all do largely without options. India may ‘need’ her not inconsiderable taxes, but with the vast amount of corruption in that Russia loving country as well as the £50 odd million in aid we are giving them this year, I am sure they could manage with a little less!

Hardly useless when he is shining a light on the hypocracy and curruption from the current incumbents.

It's perfectly legal to declare non dom status. She's a citizen of India and pays her taxes from Indian companies in India. She apparently has dual citizenship with UK and pays UK tax on her UK earnings. She is also a private citizen even though married to the Chancellor and wherever the pair of them decide to offer their charitable donations is entirely up to them. Nobody knows where else any other donations may have been made. Some of these statements do smack a little of envy, lets just give them a break.

icanhandthemback

Mrs Sunak is doing nothing wrong. She is not a politician and can do this without breaking the law. If the politicians don't like this (and this has been allowed for years and years) then the law should be changed.
Most people do not pay the maximum amount of tax they possibly can, will claim the various allowances and moan about any tax increases but get very offended when other people try to limit their tax bills. These loopholes can be closed and our energies should be put in to campaigning for them to closed rather than criticising the people using them.

Absolutely agree.
I don’t like it though.

knspol

It's perfectly legal to declare non dom status. She's a citizen of India and pays her taxes from Indian companies in India. She apparently has dual citizenship with UK and pays UK tax on her UK earnings. She is also a private citizen even though married to the Chancellor and wherever the pair of them decide to offer their charitable donations is entirely up to them. Nobody knows where else any other donations may have been made. Some of these statements do smack a little of envy, lets just give them a break.

No, she doesn't have dual citizenship.

The good law project in an interview said. She has done nothing wrong it's legal but as a chancellor dealing with tax you can't enforce rules for the people on non Dom if wife is non Dom or words to that affect.

My husband was non dom for 6 years as all his work was done in Saudi Arabia and his salary was taxed there. He spent his time between Saudi and The UK. Once his work was back in the UK his tax was taken in the UK. This is normal.

Well it perfectly legal but whether it's moral is another matter, and whether it's moral when her husband is colluding with a Tory government to perpetuate the need for nurses and teachers to have to use foodbanks is definitely a question I can answer with a resounding no.

The situation will only change when people who live in council houses and use the NHS realise where those benefits came from and stop voting Tory when they feel they've come up in the world.

Spec1alk

My husband was non dom for 6 years as all his work was done in Saudi Arabia and his salary was taxed there. He spent his time between Saudi and The UK. Once his work was back in the UK his tax was taken in the UK. This is normal.

I don't think that's the same as non-dom.

Urmstongran

In my opinion - What Sunak needs to get to grips with is this: he’s inured to tax and cost of living rises, almost all the rest of us are not.

So, when he says we have to suck it up, it really doesn’t sit well. When he has the means to make our lives less expensive, and doesn’t yet still splurges our money on non-essential things like ‘net-zero’ and HS2, the kind of things that could have money wasted on them when the sun was shining, it also doesn’t sit well.

Bottom line, a really, really rich person telling us he needs more of our money to spend on things we don’t need or want grates very badly.

I think it would be hard to say that the Conservatives are accustomed (inured) to low taxes, Urmstongran. It is far more complicated than that, although that is certainly what they would have us believe. They would also have us believe that Labour is profligate when it comes to taxes. This too is exaggerated.

For example, the rise in tax and spending under Harold Wilson in the 1960s had already begun under Harold Macmillan's Conservative government. There are many other, similar examples that disprove the Tory line.

It is simply the culture war the Conservatives rely on and has never been as true as the propaganda would have us believe. However, it seems that with the MSM behind them, rather like Putin, the Conservatives have never had a problem persuading the masses.

She doesn’t pay tax here but was quite happy to use furlong cash.
www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/sunaks-non-dom-wife-claimed-hundreds-of-thousands-of-pounds-in-furlough-cash-318605/amp/?fbclid=IwAR2mrQ56G1kDT1_SJRGJJGz9s9zQNJEwmEL5rm2CwtW9ZUxskIsRrUYMPDI

Maizie Thanks for explaining the difference between residence and domicile. I've just come on this morning and was girding my loins to do so and you've saved me the trouble.

Urmstongram If, as a UK resident with income abroad, you are taxed at source on that income in the country in which it arises. You then receive a credit for the foreign tax against your UK income.

Anyone previously employed by the UK state, such as teachers, even if they live abroad, is taxed by the UK on their employment pension (this does not include the state retirement pension). That same pension has to be declared in their country of residence. At which point the DDTs come into play.

It really wouldn’t kill her ti pay tax on her other income in gb. Her children go to school here . She lives in a grace and favour house. She is richer than the Queen apparently. Just greedy

Time for a change in the law about non-doms - if you live here for more than a year you pay taxes here.
Same for big corporations - taxes paid on any profits on purchases made in this country regardless of where the mother ship is registered.

As I understand it she’s been living in Britain for 8 years and now pays £30,000 to maintain her non dom status. Her spokesperson says she will return to India at some point to care for her elderly parents. Presumably this will be before the 15 year time limit for non Dom’s-then she can return and start all over again. It might be legal but looks hypocritical when your husband is taxing the struggling poor and your Downing Street flat and country residence are funded by those taxes

His wife definitely needs looking into. There's loads of MPs of all parties that could do with an investigation into their own and their families financial circumstances. Accountants make a lot of money by finding loopholes these should be plugged, especially for high paid high-ranking officials.

Facts - I love them.

1. Akshata Murthy is a citizen of India.
2. India does not allow its citizens to hold the citizenship of another country simultaneously.
3. Domicile has nothing to do with a person’s nationality.
4. Domicile has nothing to do with not being able to have a British passport.
5. No one is given non-domiciled status unless they apply for it. A person is only non-domiciled if they ask to be.
6. Nationality will not ever mean you are automatically non-domiciled.
7. A person can give up the claim to be non-domiciled at any time.
8. Your claim for not being domiciled in the UK can be based on you having no strong ties with the UK or a source of income, that you actively manage, elsewhere.
9. The IR consider the longer you are in the UK the less you are likely to be domiciled elsewhere.

Looking at whether Ms Murthy has strong ties with the UK and could be considered to be domiciled here we can see:

1. She has, with her husband, four homes. Three in the UK and a "holiday home" in the USA. She does not appear to own a home in India.
2. They choose to holiday in the USA and not India.
3. She is married to a man whose current career is only possible in the UK.
4. It appears the children of this marriage are educated herein the UK.

There may be ties to India we are not aware of but surely the Inland Revenue should be asking questions?

These facts are almost entirely thanks to Is the Chancellor’s wife really a non-dom? It’s a question needing an answer (taxresearch.org.uk) I would be really interested in facts from other, equally qualified sources.

Anyway Sunak’s wife isn’t a public figure and her tax affairs are nothing to do with us.

Well, I'm afraid they are.

Firstly, if there is a case to be made for ending non dom status how much could our Chancellor be depended on not to be influenced in his decision whether or not to end it by the fact that it is an extremely financially advantageous status for his wife to have?

This is a conflict of interest. In most 'governing' institutions persons with a conflict of interest are not allowed to take any part in making decisions about areas which involve that 'conflict'. Can't do that with with the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Secondly, do we have a Chancellor who doesn't intend the UK to be his permanent home? If we do, we can question how whole hearted is his commitment to the country in which he holds one of the highest offices of state.

Oh, try this one:

She even pays reduced taxes in India on her Indian investments.

www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/explainer-why-is-akshata-murthys-wealth-controversial-6171951.html

I know I’ll get told off for mentioning brexit but there’s quite a link with India and brexit. A lot of Indian people voted for brexit because they were aggrieved that Europeans could come and work/live here easier than their relatives. There were also a lot of attempts to get Indian people to fill the gaps left by EU workers who no longer felt welcome here. Johnson desperate to get trade deals with India to fill trade deals lost with the EU. And, to add insult to injury, India appear to be siding with Putin at this moment in time.

Ailidh

I hold no brief for the Sunaks - her, I don't know; him I don't know either but I was appalled by the spring statement.

However, I don't see why she should have to pay tax on income which has been earned and taxed in another country. As far as I can see its legal, and while I support taxation 100% to fund key services, I couldn't warm to the idea of having to pay it twice.

But she’s not living in India, she’s living in the UK and benefitting from our economy. The deal is, you pay tax into the communal pot for the good of everyone. This is a loophole that the wealthy regularly take advantage of, and given the governments’ track record of utter contempt shown for the public facing difficulties because of the pandemic and the economic climate, it’s reprehensible that anyone connected to any government minister should be allowed to take advantage of it. There’s only so much hypocrisy the public can stomach.

A non- Dom must have an expectation to return to their country so where does that leave Rishi? Is she going to leave him behind or is he just living in the UK until she returns home? Or perhaps a marriage of convenience, or a long distance relationship? I think it throws their committment to the country he's in government into question

Yet we send aid to India….no comment.

Urmstongram If, as a UK resident with income abroad, you are taxed at source on that income in the country in which it arises. You then receive a credit for the foreign tax against your UK income.

Anyone previously employed by the UK state, such as teachers, even if they live abroad, is taxed by the UK on their employment pension (this does not include the state retirement pension). That same pension has to be declared in their country of residence. At which point the DDTs come into play.

Thank you Dinahmo for explaining this. ?