<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>The Tories' non-dom trouble</title>
		<description>Comments for The Tories' non-dom trouble at http://www.adamsmith.org , comment 1 to 1 out of 1 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.adamsmith.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:44:34 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/economics/the-tories%27-non%11dom-trouble-200804231269/#comment-75</link>
			<description>This piece assumes that Non-Doms are only interested in locating somewhere where their marginal rate of tax is zero. Why are you assuming that these individuals are attracted to the UK just because of the tax regime here. They might enjoy the fact that living in a world city such as London provides them with a huge number of facilities, i.e. entertainment, culture and allows them to mingle with the entrepreneurs/financiers/business people already located there. Does Switzerland or Bermuda offer such non-pecuniary advantages? 

The argument here is that they provide jobs and investment to the UK economy - but my argument is that being located in the UK also provides them with advantages. Therefore, why do we believe that a change in the tax regime is such a big disincentive to remain here? - Dr Andrew Johnston</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:36:06 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
