If you could start from scratch, what philosophical principles would you want to underpin our taxation system?

No, the rules vary from country to country. Some of our French Gransnetters could probably confirm/deny this but in France I think a British resident pays tax on foreign and domestic income in France, whether they are domiciled there or not.

In some cases the foreign country will take into account any tax you have already paid elsewhere before taxing you. In other countries you get taxed twice on the same income.

Andsoontobe you are right, absent is wrong. Non Doms do may tax, but only on their UK earnings. And, to be fair, since most of those claiming Non Dom status are high flyers (that means they can afford to pay £30,000 each year to the treasury for their Non Dom status) they actually make a significant contribution to our state coffers. It is estimated that they contribute £8.2 billion to the treasury compared with the £2.7bn paid by the bottom 25% of UK taxpayers
pay.

Under those circumstances I see no reason why they should not benefit from the NHS, schools etc etc.

and what absent says is wrong?

Does it work in reverse then?
British go abraod and be Non Dom in a different country, and same rules apply?

Non Doms pay tax on British earnings, but not on any income derived from overseas while British taxpayers pay tax in the UK on all their earnings no matter where in the world they are generated.

The advantage to a Non Dom of being a Non Dom is that their foreign earnings are probably generated and taxed in countries with a tax regime that means they pay less tax on these earnings than they would in the UK. That is why so many of them are prepared to pay the Non Dom levy of £70,000, or whatever it is, because this is so much less than the tax they save by having all their overseas income filtered through the Cayman islands or Luxembourg or whatever.

Personally I would limit Non Dom status to 5 years and after that they should be taxed as if they are normally resident in the UK. To keep their Non Dom status after 5 years they should have to prove that they live in the UK for less than 6 months of each year.

I still havent got my head around non doms.
They pay tax on british earnings the bbc link says, which is what everyone else does?

GillT57. Having reread my link from the Telegraph, the tax figures are actually from HMRC, so I think my link from 23.08pm on monday is near enough.

I read this
www.bbc.co.uk/news/32213003

which appears to say something completely different.
I will read it with fresh eyes tomorrow.

It means that?
Oh. I shall have to go back and have a reread of what I read. I didnt read it like that at all.

Non-domiciled for tax purposes means that someone can live all year round in the UK using all the services paid for by taxpayers – e.g. the NHS – but remain exempt from paying taxes. Seems pretty obviously wrong to me.

I have had to google non - doms as dont know a thing about them.
I cant quite see what is wrong about them at first glance.

Far east would welcome them with open arms I suspect.
Very high earning english speaking people seem to be urged to go to other countries.

Agreed, absent. Their bluff should be called. This government hasn't managed to keep Branson in this country. He is now a non-dom.

The threat that business leaders, especially those in the financial sector, will leave the country if a) they are taxed at a higher rate or b) tax loopholes are closed has been made many times over the years. However, there are few places to go where they will be able to claim proportionately higher salaries and certainly not many in the EU. American entrepreneurs and business leaders do earn vast amounts of money but the US is quite protective of its own and is certainly not going to welcome the "huddled masses" from the London stock exchange.

Talking about people who are brilliant in their research field, I did enjoy the two parter 'Code of a Killer' about the pioneering research on DNA profiling by Sir Alec Jeffreys.
An outstandingly brilliant and modest man.

Sorry, a bit of a red herring but in response to janea's post above 12.43.03

And bad spellers as in my previous post janea
There for all the www to see!
I was rushing out and trying to type it on the tab (no excuse)

However much money or brains they have, they still only have one vote each.

Pompa. Yes, you did. A new thought; what justification is there for giving people who attract high salaries or have the skill of making money any special consideration? We might consider giving special tax breaks to individuals doing essential jobs - often at the bottom of the heap in wages.

I did say salaries/conditions.

The problem is, in deciding who needs help and who makes the decision. Yes, pompa I understood the point you were making. I was trying to say that we can't afford to lose any of these highly skilled people and the ones who go aren't always or solely driven by income.

Lillygran, by "his" if you mean me, I was not suggesting that professional people were not ripe for leaving Britain for higher salaries/conditions elsewhere. I was pointing out that these are not the extremely high earners.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs Is generally recognised as the philosophy which underpins the writing/philosophy of Karl Marx and the foundation of Marxism but apparently the phrase actually predates him. It is a wonderful ideal, but I think the way the ideals of Marxism and Communism degenerated into the "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others of "Animal Farm" suggests it doesn't always work when you factor in the weaknesses of human nature.
No harm in working towards an ideal though.

I agree roseq, perhaps too many people suffer from the British disease if Not Blowing Your Own Trumpet. Modesty rules.
This isn't just true in business - it applies to professions too.
We hear too much about bad doctors, bad teachers etc and hardly ever about the ones who go the extra mile every day for no extra reward, or who are brilliant in their research field.
Perhaps if we did, more business people would follow John Caudwell's example - the phenomenon of social reinforcement.

I am very pleased to see that, janea.
Of course, the good often get much less publicity thsn the greedy and doenright bad.
More's the pity!

From each according to his ability to each according to his need.

I had not heard of that before.
Has it been tried anywhere? Did it work? What would then happen about those who dont enjoy working? Are they counted as having ability?

roseq
Not all wealthy people are tax avoiders.
Here's a link to a modern-day philanthropist, in the interests of fairness.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Caudwell
Look at 'current projects' and scroll down to 'charity and philanthropy'

"In 1999, Caudwell was appointed as the President of the North Staffordshire branch of the NSPCC, and became the regional representative for the Full Stop campaign. Of the appointment, he says: "I was initially approached by the NSPCC to sponsor a cricket match. As is my way I got stuck in, took the whole thing over and was determined to raise as much money as I could." He was inspired to help children because of this experience: "I went to one of the NSPCC's centres and met some of the children who had been victims of cruelty and sexual abuse and it really opened my heart to helping children."[8]

Building on his previous philanthropic work for children, Caudwell founded the charity Caudwell Children in 2000 to help improve the lives of children in Staffordshire and South Cheshire who are living with disabilities. It became a national charity in 2006, and Caudwell is currently the chairman of the board of Trustees.[9] Of the charity, he said: "I wanted to make sure that every penny that was raised would be put to the best use and spent on the children that needed it. My family puts about £2 million a year towards Caudwell Children. In addition I put in a lot of my time and I do a lot of networking. [But] the truth is my fortune isn't enough to help all the children that need help."[10]

I saw him on a TV programme a few months ago and he came across an an ordinary, decent, honest bloke.