Keir Starmer should be bold and consider a wealth tax, Neil Kinnock says | Labour
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jul/06/neil-kinnock-keir-starmer-wealth-tax
by Azzadal
Keir Starmer should be bold and consider a wealth tax, Neil Kinnock says | Labour
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jul/06/neil-kinnock-keir-starmer-wealth-tax
by Azzadal
30 comments
Completely unrelated to the topic of the article but
> Kinnock was scathing about the move by Jeremy Corbyn and other former Labour MPs to set up their own leftwing party. “I understand the difficulty of thinking up a name, and in a comradely way, I’d suggest one: It would be the Farage Assistance Group.”
Surely he knew what the acronym would be when he said that? Kinnock does a little trolling
LAND VALUE TAX:
Easier to implement, basically impossible to avoid
Or just cut the triple lock ffs. It’s going to bankrupt us in the most unfair way possible
Imo I’d rather see a new income tax band aimed at those making upwards of a million or so. The fact that it’s 45% whether you’re making £126,000 or £1,260,000 a year just seems absurd to me.
Kinnock was leader of the opposition for most of the time Thatcher was in power. Imagine how bad things might have been if he hadn’t kept her in check.
That’d be nice. But man, it’s deeply ironic coming from the guy who instigated the rightward shift that still affects Labour to this day. A lot of people blame Blair, but he merely entrenched it. It was Kinnock who initiated the first major move to the right after the success of Thatcher. There’s absolutely zero chance that Reeves, McSweeney, or in particular Mandelson would ever back a wealth tax as party policy.
Implement a land value tax which works in a principle similar to a wealth tax but has the added benefit of incentivising developers to build housing which is reason enough to be at least considering it. If I ever became PM, one of the first things I would do is push hard to get an LVT passed through parliament but it would likely be an uphill battle due to strong opposition. The Tories would be vehemently opposed to it and even some Labour MPs wouldn’t vote for it, the greens would probably love it though so there is a chance that it can be done
He should have stayed the course and cancelled the WFP for those who didn’t need it.
But he chickened out.
That would mean he has to tax himself and his cronies, not happening
Government is only really able to tax transactions. Issue with wealth tax by nature seems to be that the money isn’t moving. It’s just being held/tied up in a static asset. If someone said “we’re going to start taxing you because your property happens to sit on valuable land – you need to pay us”, then that’s ultimately coming from my income, not from selling the property (I can’t extract money from a ‘potential’ sale – it’s not generating money until it’s sold.)
We need to understand the moments where ‘wealth’ is earning someone income, and tax that. But I suspect we already are. Capital gains etc.
The only way I can see is to boost inheritance taxes. But that in itself stops people from supporting their children and growing their family security over generations. So I’m not a massive fan of that either.
Perhaps we can find some sort of threshold where we deem it ‘excessive’ and leave the rest untouched. But man that is not going to be popular.
I think a great opportunity for a Land Value Tax, would be the opportunity to use penalties to incentivise productive deployment of land. A property developer buys up a bunch of land, gets planning permission on it then sits around not doing nothing? Cool, ramp up that tax rate until they build or sell it on to someone who will. People buying farmland and not using it for agriculture? Same deal.
Land value tax would be a good start. High value and do it gradually. Focus on banked land that’s being hoarded for its increasing value. You could even offer sweeteners like discounts on capital gains taxes from the sale.
This would also help housing as developers would be incentivised to build more to avoid the taxes
There’s a reason barely any countries have percentage based wealth taxes – they are highly impractical and nearly impossible to enforce. I say this a tax adviser by profession and therefore somebody with a vested interest in a wealth tax – as I would be paid lots of money to calculate it, mitigate it, or dispute valuations with HMRC.
Outside of my pension, S&S ISA, and premium bonds my main assets are chattels – e.g. hopefully around £5,000 of Pokémon cards. Just think about all the problems with the government taxing these, for example:
* How would HMRC even know I owned these Pokémon cards? A wealth tax return would entirely rely on me being honest – which would be naïve for anyone to assume.
* Even in good faith people won’t always remember what they own. I personally didn’t know of [my rarest card’s value](https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=pokemon+center+promo+40+2001&_sacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313&rt=nc&_odkw=pokemon+center+promo+40&_osacat=0&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1) until 20 years after I got it for free in New York – and what would happen [in situations like this?](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/27/renaissance-painting-cimabue-found-kitchen-france-sells-24m-euros-auction) or basically any episode of Antiques Roadshow – Would she have committed tax evasion because she didn’t know of her rare painting? Otherwise surely pleading ignorance would be a “get out of jail free” card.
* How could I ascertain their open market value? Even if I were to go to great expense and get all my cards professionally valued, their market value may still differ – [see this instance last year](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-68969058).
* Do you honestly think HMRC disputing Pokémon card values (hypothetically going all the way to the Supreme Court) is a good use of public money and resources?
* My Pokémon cards would already be liable to Income Tax and NIC (if I sold them piecemeal as a business), Capital Gains Tax (if I sold them one off as a capital asset), or Inheritance Tax (if I kept them until death). Is taxing them annually really necessary?
And just to pre-empt anyone arguing this is a strawman argument and that a wealth tax would only apply to people richer than me – each of the above still applies even if I were the richest man on Earth. Additionally, most or all the above apply to any kind of personal possession, not just Pokémon cards – whether it be paintings, NFTs, privately held businesses, racehorses, antiques, etc.
The only country that can be seen to have a wealth tax that “works” is Switzerland, but that’s only because they lack a Capital Gains Tax, certain cantons lack an Inheritance Tax (e.g. Obwalden), exempts many chattels, is a very low percentage, and is often subject to a cap. Doing that in the UK would be unpalatable to most people on the Left calling for a wealth tax.
Ah yes, just what this country needs, another way to punish people for being successful while scroungers and layabouts do nothing and benefit. The reason so many people are unemployed and on benefits is because this country doesn’t reward hard work and good decisions. If someone has worked hard and managed to build a good life for themselves and their family, why should they pay for someone who hasn’t bothered?
Also, the system is fundamentally broken, people don’t seem to understand that throwing more money at it won’t fix it, only serious reform will. We have one of the most well funded healthcare systems in Europe, probably the world, and it still doesn’t work. People are taxed to an extortionate extent and get nothing in return – the NHS, education, police etc are all failing.
We probably wouldn’t need more tax if politicians on both sides stopped spending money like a drunken sailor on shore leave.
And see more innovators and wealth creator flee? Need to reduce the size of government.
LVT could work but we’d need to see the details.
Could also stop handing out money to everyone who enters the country with no means to provide for themselves.
We could also trim the size of government. The house is jam packed with peoe earning £90k+ a year who fall asleep, sit on their phones or just nod like the Churchill dog every now and again.
Another way to save money, cancel the Chagos deal immediately.
Might be worth asking France for some of the £450m we’ve sent them just so they’ll police their own shoreline.
Land Value Tax, with new higher bands triggered from the next time the property is sold on properties, say, over £750k.
Then none of the ultra rich can cry foul because it only starts after they’ve decided to purchase said property.
I doubt the union chiefs will like that. They are among the most wealthy lol.
Why is “being bold” always about confiscating more money away from people? Why is it never about making regular people’s lives better.
The major issues facing young people are lack of housing and high taxes+lack of growth.
Focus on legalizing building new housing rather than cooking up new ways to confiscate wealth+spend it on economic migrants coming over on small boats.
There’s going to be a real problem where more and more folks jobs are ‘outsourced’ to AI and autonomous systems – it seriously undermines the tax system as there’s less taxable productivity in the economy, and more ‘asset’ consolidation.
If you replace one job with one robot, the tax burden of using the robot should fall on the owner of the robot.
LAND VALUE TAX!!!! Why isn’t it ever considered or spoken about. Why?
Why is this considered bold for Labour? It wasn’t considered bold to go after pensioners and disabled folk.
Why’s it seem like he has to really think about this when he’ll attack the farmers, the disabled and the elderly without provocation
Any tax on the wealthy is a pipe dream. The donors are not spending millions bribing politicians and not for virtuous reasons. They want to stay wealthy, and the only way you do that is by buying prime ministers and influencing policy. Every party has this problem.
A wealth tax is economic populism in its purest form. Unlikely to raise significant revenues, guaranteed to damage economic confidence, but still beloved by many voters who wished effective taxation was that simple.
Land value tax is the complete opposite, the voters who have heard of it often find it unacceptable yet everyone who looks at the economics of it knows it’s the fairest and least distortionary form of taxation.
I can’t remember who gave this quote recently but it was quite telling: “What is economically imperative in the UK economy right now is politically impossible, but what is politically imperative is economically impossible.” This pretty much sums it up, but I do think there is a chance to try something radical, and that’s to think long term and do what’s right even if it’s difficult.
Nope – only thing the supposed party of the workers can do is raise taxes on workers. Taxing those who can actually afford to pay more would be far too radical for Labour.
Yes he should consider doing the thing a lot of people fucking voted him in for
I’m sure Keir saw what happened to the last Labour leader who tried to be bold.
Oh no, that would mean the Labour Party has to be the Labour Party
Comments are closed.