Rishi Sunak leaves no doubt he’s staking premiership on Rwanda flights plan

Published

1 year ago

April 22, 2024

admin

The prime minister wouldn’t put a number on how many asylum seekers he intended to send to Rwanda to have their claims processed.

But Rishi Sunak‘s news conference on Monday left no doubt this is the policy on which he is staking his premiership.

He didn’t talk today about the odd flight getting off the ground. Instead, he talked about a regular rhythm of flights beginning in July, deporting perhaps thousands of migrants.

Politics live: Lords vote for amendment to government’s Rwanda bill again

He refused to give us a number of how many people he wanted to send to Rwanda but doubled down on his promises.

When I asked him whether passing his Safety of Rwanda bill was a moment of success, he immediately replied that “success is when the boats have been stopped, that is what the country expects”.

It seems a near-impossible task.

Boat crossings this year have risen 25% against 2023, with 6,265 people, and there is obvious scepticism as to whether flights to Rwanda would really deter asylum seekers from making the crossing.

There is also plenty of scepticism that the government won’t be hamstrung by legal challenges again.

But Mr Sunak said he was “confident” the plan complied with all international obligations, hinting he would be prepared to ignore the European Court of Human Rights if necessary.

“If it ever comes to a choice between our national security – securing our borders – and membership of a foreign court, I’m of course always going to prioritise our national security,” the prime minister said.

There are still plenty of legal and political risks, but Mr Sunak was crystal clear: the flights will continue as long as the boats keep coming and he will deliver on this pledge to make the Rwanda scheme fully operational.

“The PM is on the front foot on this,” said one senior government figure. “He’s all over it and determined to deliver the policy”.

To that end, commercial flights have been organised, an airfield put on standby and 500 officials trained to escort migrants to Rwanda.

Around 2,200 detention spaces have been reserved for those the government plans to remove and 25 courtrooms reserved to deal with legal challenges to get the flights away in 10 to 12 weeks.

‘Doomed to fail’

But after all the false starts, will it really happen?

There are those on his own benches – Suella Braverman, Robert Jenrick and a couple of dozen of others – who voted against this bill and simply think it won’t work.

Lord Carlisle, the lawyer and crossbench peer, told me the prime minister “is doomed to fail”.

“The boats have not been stopped,” he said. “The number of people arriving on boats has increased, despite blanket publicity for this policy the government is trying to push through.

“The way you stop the boats is dealing with the criminal gangs and by the government increasing the administrators that will look at which asylum seekers and refugees are dealt with. It’s not rocket science.

“What they are doing at the moment is near to the realms of fantasy.”

But for the prime minister, still so far behind in the polls, what has he got to lose?

He’s staked his reputation on this policy and has no other option to try to make it a success. Tackling small boats will be the pledge he’s judged on when the general election comes.

Talk of flights through the summer into autumn, as well as a mooted fiscal event later in the year, point to an election in the autumn (with two senior figures telling me in recent days December is now being talked up too).

But none of this comes in time for the more imminent ballot box test of next week’s local elections, which could not only put him back on his heels, but into freefall once more.

He clearly has the plan, whether he will have the political space to implement it is another matter

Politics

US CLARITY bill could allow Tesla and Meta to evade SEC rules — Senator Warren

Published

2 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

US CLARITY bill could allow Tesla and Meta to evade SEC rules — Senator Warren

The legislation to establish crypto market structure is one of three bills the US House of Representatives is expected to consider starting next week.

Politics

What is a wealth tax, how would it work in the UK and where else has one?

Published

4 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

What is a wealth tax, how would it work in the UK and where else has one?

The idea of a wealth tax has raised its head – yet again – as the government attempts to balance its books.

Downing Street refused to rule out a wealth tax after former Labour leader Lord Kinnock told Sky News he thinks the government should introduce one.

Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman said: “The prime minister has repeatedly said those with the broadest shoulders should carry the largest burden.”

While there has never been a wealth tax in the UK, the notion was raised under Rishi Sunak after the COVID years – and rejected – and both Harold Wilson’s and James Callaghan’s Labour governments in the 1970s seriously considered implementing one.

Sky News looks at what a wealth tax is, how it could work in the UK, and which countries already have one.

What is a wealth tax?

A wealth tax is aimed at reducing economic inequality to redistribute wealth and to raise revenue.

It is a direct levy on all, or most of, an individual’s, household’s or business’s total net wealth, rather than their income.

The tax typically includes the total market value of assets, including savings, investments, property and other forms of wealth – minus a person’s debts.

Unlike capital gains tax, which is paid when an asset is sold at a profit, a wealth tax is normally an annual charge based on the value of assets owned, even if they are not sold.

A one-off wealth tax, often used after major crises, could also be an option to raise a substantial amount of revenue in one go.

How could it work in the UK?

Advocates of a UK wealth tax, including Lord Kinnock, have proposed an annual 2% tax on wealth above £10m.

Wealth tax campaign group Tax Justice UK has calculated this would affect about 20,000 people – fewer than 0.04% of the population – and raise £24bn a year.

Because of how few people would pay it, Tax Justice says that would make it easy for HMRC to collect the tax.

The group proposes people self-declare asset values, backed up by a compliance team at HMRC who could have a register of assets.

Which countries have or have had a wealth tax?

In 1990, 12 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries had a net wealth tax, but just four have one now: Colombia, Norway, Spain and Switzerland.

France and Italy levy wealth taxes on selected assets.

Colombia

Since 2023, residents in the South American country are subject to tax on their worldwide wealth, but can exclude the value of their household up to 509m pesos (£92,500).

The tax is progressive, ranging from a 0.5% rate to 1.5% for the most wealthy until next year, then 1% for the wealthiest from 2027.

Norway

There is a 0.525% municipal wealth tax for individuals with net wealth exceeding 1.7m kroner (about £125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses.

Norway also has a state wealth tax of 0.475% based on assets exceeding a net capital tax basis of 1.7m kroner (£125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses, and 0.575% for net wealth in excess of 20.7m kroner (£1.5m).

The maximum combined wealth tax rate is 1.1%.

The Norwegian Labour coalition government also increased dividend tax to 20% in 2023, and with the wealth tax, it prompted about 80 affluent business owners, with an estimated net worth of £40bn, to leave Norway.

Spain

Residents in Spain have to pay a progressive wealth tax on worldwide assets, with a €700,000 (£600,000) tax free allowance per person in most areas and homes up to €300,000 (£250,000) tax exempt.

The progressive rate goes from 0.2% for taxable income for assets of €167,129 (£144,000) up to 3.5% for taxable income of €10.6m (£9.146m) and above.

It has been reported that more than 12,000 multimillionaires have left Spain since the government introduced the higher levy at the end of 2022.

Switzerland

All of the country’s cantons (districts) have a net wealth tax based on a person’s taxable net worth – different to total net worth.

It takes into account the balance of an individual’s worldwide gross assets, including bank account balances, bonds, shares, life insurances, cars, boats, properties, paintings, jewellery – minus debts.

Switzerland also works on a progressive rate, ranging from 0.3% to 0.5%, with a relatively low starting point at which people are taxed on their wealth, such as 50,000 CHF (£46,200) in several cantons.

Politics

Jingye and Whitehall officials hold talks over British Steel future

Published

7 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

Jingye and Whitehall officials hold talks over British Steel future

The Chinese owner of British Steel has held fresh talks with government officials in a bid to break the impasse over ministers’ determination not to compensate it for seizing control of the company.

Sky News has learnt that executives from Jingye Group met senior civil servants from the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) late last week to discuss ways to resolve the standoff.

Whitehall sources said the talks had been cordial, but that no meaningful progress had been made towards a resolution.

Money blog: €1 home goes on sale – but there are T&Cs

Jingye wants the government to agree to pay it hundreds of millions of pounds for taking control of British Steel in April – a move triggered by the Chinese group’s preparations for the permanent closure of its blast furnaces in Scunthorpe.

Such a move would have cost thousands of jobs and ended Britain’s centuries-old ability to produce virgin steel.

Jingye had been in talks for months to seek £1bn in state aid to facilitate the Scunthorpe plant’s transition to greener steelmaking, but was offered just half that sum by ministers.

British Steel has not yet been formally nationalised, although that remains a probable outcome.

Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, has previously dismissed the idea of compensating Jingye, saying British Steel’s equity was essentially worthless.

Last month, he met his Chinese counterpart, where the issue of British Steel was discussed between the two governments in person for the first time.

Jingye has hired the leading City law firm Linklaters to explore the recovery of hundreds of millions of pounds it invested in the Scunthorpe-based company before the government seized control of it.

News of last week’s meeting comes as British steelmakers face an anxious wait to learn whether their exports to the US face swingeing tariffs as part of US President Donald Trump’s trade war.

Sky News’s economics and data editor, Ed Conway, revealed this week that the UK would miss a White House-imposed deadline to agree a trade deal on steel and aluminium this week.

Jingye declined to comment, while a spokesman for the Department for Business and Trade said: “We acted quickly to ensure the continued operations of the blast furnaces but recognise that securing British Steel’s long-term future requires private sector investment.

“We have not nationalised British Steel and are working closely with Jingye on options for the future, and we will continue work on determining the best long-term sustainable future for the site.”