Remember the non-doms, who were living it large in this country?  They got to shelter all their overseas earnings from the UK taxman by paying tax only on income earned in or remitted to the UK. So rich folk like Lord Ashcroft could live in the UK but avoid paying tax on their worldwide earnings, something that ordinary Brits would be unable to do.

Sensing trouble, and egged on by overzealous tax campaigners, the government decided to change the regime for non-doms. Instead of getting the remittance basis for nothing, they would need to opt in to it. Broadly speaking, it would cost £30,000 a year to opt in. If you didn't opt in, then you would pay tax on your worldwide earnings just like any domiciled UK resident.  These proposals built on earlier Tory plans for a £25,000 annual charge.

Critics of the proposals said that non-doms don't have to live in the UK, they merely choose to.  They would probably respond to the increased cost by moving to another country, taking precious tax payments with them.  But this was pooh-poohed by the experts.  Richard Murphy (for it is he) rubbished the claims.  The £25,000 plan would, in his view, raise an extra £2bn annually for the Treasury.  Surveys suggested that maybe people wouldn't leave, at least no more than they do so already anyway. Later, Ritchie got even more strident, stating emphatically that they just won't go.

So, what actually has happened since the law was introduced?

According to the Treasury figures, in response to a Freedom of Information request, around 16,000, or 11.5% of non-doms have left the UK since the introduction of the non-dom tax, the Telegraph reported.

Non-doms pay £4bn in income tax, according to Treasury estimates, and another £3bn in other taxes such as capital gains, VAT and stamp duty, Damian Reece wrote in a column.

Reece, citing Inland Revenue figures that 11.5% of non-doms left the UK in 2008/09, estimates that this has cost the government about £800m in lost taxes.

The latest Freedom of Information figures show that the non-dom levy was "a dubious idea at best, as far as our public finances were concerned", Reece adds.

People who read this post also read:

• Interesting comments on tax gap estimates
• In defence of Ken Livingstone
• Bad news for the audit-bashers
• The lazy anti-auditor rhetoric must stop
• Hell no, they won’t come!

Filed under: Taxation with tags accountancy age, domicile, hm treasury, idiots, richard murphy, telegraph