No, just the opposite. In general, the things wealthy people buy (luxuries) experience much larger swings in demand due to price changes like added taxes (in economic terms, "the elasticity of demand"). It's because they are only wants and not needs. They are also usually easily swapped. Instead of buying your wife those diamond earrings, you could get her a painting or a trip to Spain. And rich people are often very money savvy.

It's the necessities that people will continue to buy (or at least replace with close substitutes), regardless of what happens to the price.

Obviously, in this case it worked out much differently, but no, in general you can't say the wealthy people don't respond to price changes due to their wealth.

> without any concern over the cost of doing it?

indeed thats why to have accountants and lawyers, the issue here is that non-dom meant that you could avoid paying tax on stuff you earnt outside of the UK. for example if you have a lot of income being generated in the USA, then being a non-dom meant that you could avoid paying tax here in the UK at the same time.

For US citizens its a bit harder, as you're liable for tax on all income, regardless of source. I'm not sure how they get round that, debt financing or something similar I imagine

That's exactly what I don't get. If you're a billionaire and your whole lifestyle goes topsy-turvy because of some new legislation, what's the point of being a billionaire?

E.g. Lakshmi Mittal, one of the richest persons in the UK, was rumored to consider moving to the UAE because of the non-dom rule changes.[1] To me it's ridiculous that a person this rich feels such weak control over where they should live. And it's not like moving from the UK to the UAE is like moving from Switzerland to Austria. It's a humongous upset by most measures.

[1] https://www.cityam.com/steel-billionaire-lakshmi-mittal-to-d...

I imagine the exodus was where the corporation is incorporated. And on paper someone with billions of dollars now has a mere 500k. Or whatever loophole their lawyers decided to figure out.

Yes, but if they have to pay a fair amount of tax they will only be able to afford a 40 metre yacht, rather than the 50 metre yachts that all their frenemies have and that just won't do.

I don't think these people would be superrich if they wouldn't be optimizing their taxes, at least at some level. I would guess taxes are the typically the biggest single expense the really rich people pay.

> however people no longer necessarily invest where they live

This is a problem. The UK is experiencing what the US is experiencing so I hope you don't mind.

I'm all invested in the US. My citizenship, my family ties, my finances, and my language. Immigrating to a five-eyes nation would be far easier for me (racism aside).

There's no going back for me and my family, unless I want to immigrate out and start from the very bottom with absolutely nothing.

Because I'm a naturalized US citizen and I'm not white, I also harbor no illusions: There's every reason to believe that if this administration and its extremists continue down its trajectory, I and my family will eventually be subject to the worst.

I'm also not wealthy: So it's in my best interest to be a moderating voice, fight for the values that define my home, be seen giving back/paying it forward, and push for the best outcome for my home.

I'm not sure how to quantify the value add of this, and the wealthy transnationals who distinctly take without being a net positive--because they can so easily relocate--are a large part of the problem.

Indeed. The millionaires that are whining about paying their fair share of tax can ** off and not pay their taxes somewhere else. Good riddance.

Exactly. These people did not come to create new companies, employ people, come up with new products. These people came to London to party, not to contribute. They will take their party with them, but not their contributions - because there are none.

If that would have been the actual response, it wouldn't have made sense to proceed with the reform. The goal of treasury should be to maximise social welfare, not lose tax money just to dunk on the ultrarich.