David Cameron, yesterday, on Sky News:
I think it time to pass a law that says that if you want to be in the Houses of Parliament, if you want to be a legislator, you need to be or be treated as a full UK taxpayer.”
And quite right, too. But what has prompted the Tories’ Damascene conversion? After all, they had the opportunity earlier this year to vote for exactly what Mr Cameron is now, belatedly and under media pressure, calling for.
Lord (Matthew) Oakeshott’s House of Lords (Members’ Taxation Status) Bill had its second reading on 23 January 2009, and committee stage on 12 March 2009. Clause 1:1 urges:
A Member of the House of Lords is deemed to be resident, ordinarily resident and domiciled in the United Kingdom and in no other country for taxation purposes.”
Yet Lord Oakeshott’s bill has been blocked by Tory filibuster and wrecking amendments in the Lords, led by the party’s leader, Lord Strathclyde. At least until now … let us hope that David Cameron’s change of heart will influence his Parliamentary colleagues to drop their opposition.
If they do, it will be the result of the party’s embarrassment over the tax affairs of one man in particular, the highly influential Lord (Michael) Ashcroft, the Tory peer, deputy party chairman and major donor whom the Tory party is too afraid to stand up to this side of the general election. Lord Oakeshott has today written to his fellow peer, asking him to clarify whether he is a non-dom or not.
Here’s the full text of his letter:
Dear Lord Ashcroft
Your Tax Status
Your leader David Cameron said yesterday: “There are members of the House of Lords whose tax status is unclear. If you want to sit in the House of Lords or Commons you have to be a fully resident UK taxpayer”. Philip Hammond, Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, confirmed this morning this meant peers must be “Resident, ordinarily resident and domiciled in the United Kingdom for tax purposes”.
You are Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party, a leading donor and Conservative peer and, in Mr Cameron’s words your “tax status is unclear”. Are you a non dom or not?
Yours sincerely
Lord Oakeshott
As Lord Oakeshott comments:
Time and time again, senior Tories have failed to clarify Lord Ashcroft’s tax status. If it’s wrong for non-doms to sit in the Lords after the election, it’s equally wrong for them to sit in it now.”
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Another myth that should die: The Victorians covered table legs out because they thought were indecent
Graphics and AV tools for solo consultants
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Barry Smith
Steve Trevethan
Tim Rogers
Simon R
Sue Doughty
2 Comments
But another question springs from this: the fact that the donations to Central Office and beyond, come from a UK company that Lord Ashcroft is a Director of…he doesnt donate personally. The £5m spent in constituency campaigns so far has come into the coffers of the Conservatives from a UK company, which would be hard to legislate against, surely.
There is also another question…as a Nom-Dom, isnt Lord Ashcroft restricted in the number of days he can remain in the UK without become liable for full tax status?
There is also another question…as a Nom-Dom, isnt Lord Ashcroft restricted in the number of days he can remain in the UK without become liable for full tax status?
No, this is a common confusion. The so-called 90-day rule (which isn’t really a rule, but a ‘rule of thumb’) applies only to residence, which isn’t the same thing: you can be UK-domiciled but not UK-resident, and vice versa. I think in Ashcroft’s case, it’s not clear whether he is even resident here for tax purposes (if not, the amount of time he spends here does become relevant), whereas Zac Goldsmith clearly is resident here, but has a “domicile of origin” somewhere else. It’s quite difficult to lose your domicile of origin, apparently – but it would be easy for ZG to do, as he clearly lives here and his political ambitions demonstrate prima facie a commitment to this country, which is the essential basis for becoming domiciled here. What the difference is between the tax treatment of a non-resident and a non-domiciled resident I don’t know.
2 Trackbacks
[…] putting Ashcroft back into the headlines, but without pleasing the critics. Liberal Democrats have criticised the Conservatives for failing to support such a measure in the Lords earlier this year and have asked that party to support a legislative change prior to […]
[…] A week ago, Lib Dem treasury spokesman Lord (Matthew) Oakeshott wrote to his fellow peer to put the the simple question – “Are you a non-dom or not?” – to him directly: no answer as yet. It’s an issue Matthew has been pursuing for some years – see, for example, this story on LDV – Lib Dem peer attacks Lord Offshore Ashcroft – from July 2007. […]