Why the High-Net-Worth Exodus Matters (And What It Says About Policy)
But before we accept the narrative, here’s what the data suggests, where the uncertainties lie - and then a bit of a thought experiment: what would it take to reverse the trend?
What we do see in recent reports:
- The Henley Private Wealth Migration Report 2025 forecasts a net loss of ~16,500 millionaires from the UK in 2025 (i.e. more leaving than arriving), amounting to ~$91.8 billion in investable wealth.
- Since Brexit, the UK has reportedly shifted from being a net magnet for HNWIs to a net exporter: over the 2017–2023 period, about 16,500 millionaires have left the UK in net terms.
- Media coverage claims that, in 2024, more than 10,800 HNWIs departed - representing a 157% rise from 2023.
- Some analyses estimate that at least 10% of the UK’s wealthy non-dom population have relocated in response to tighter tax rules since the non-dom regime was phased out.
- More broadly, global wealth-migration data suggest that 120,000+ millionaires left their home countries in 2023, and projections for 2025 suggest 142,000 will move.
- The UK is expected to experience one of the largest net outflows of HNWIs among developed countries.
But - important caveats & counterpoints:
- The Tax Justice Network has criticized the “exodus” framing, pointing out that the “millionaires” cited in many reports are a very narrow subset (e.g. those with liquid assets ≥ $1 m) and that the numbers leaving represent only ~0.3% of the UK’s millionaire population.
- The methods used in migration/wealth reports are not always transparent. Some rely on LinkedIn profile updates, media reports, or proxy estimates rather than hard tax or residency data.
- Even large outflows, as a share of total wealth holders, may still leave a country with a robust base of wealthy individuals.
- Some “departures” may be superficial (changing tax domicile, moving capital but retaining meaningful ties) rather than full expatriation.
Conclusion on data
There is credible evidence that the UK is seeing a higher rate of wealthy individuals contemplating or executing relocation, especially after policy changes (abolishing non-dom, higher taxes). But it’s far from a mass “exodus” in relative terms - more like a worrying acceleration of mobility among the most financially mobile segment.
Tax burden & policy risk
- The UK is entering what some call its heaviest tax burden since WWII.
- Changes such as making pensions subject to inheritance tax, raising capital gains rates, and abolishing non-dom status are perceived as closing off safe havens for wealth.
- For people whose wealth is mobile (investments, generational monies, shares, trusts), even small shifts in tax regimes or the threat thereof can trigger relocation considerations.
Erosion of certainty / trust in governance
- Repeated tax changes, “tinkering” around the edges, and shifting rules create a sense that capital is always vulnerable to the next grab.
- Governments often find it politically easier to raise revenue than to reduce waste or shrink public sector scale (because costs and opposition are immediate, benefits deferred).
- The fixed-term electoral system encourages short-termism: tax hikes or new levies today, shirking structural reform that would bite, counting on successor governments to face the backlash.
Cost pressures, regulatory burden, and “squeeze” dynamics
- Beyond taxation, UK entrepreneurs and businesses face rising energy costs, regulatory overhead, inflation, planning constraints, supply chain fragility, and labour issues.
- As margins get tighter, the “friction cost” of staying versus relocating becomes more salient.
Quality-of-life, cultural & identity sentiments
- Some feel alienated by shifts in cities’ demographics, cultural changes, perceptions of declining public services or security.
- Discussions around digital ID, expanded surveillance, or more intrusive state mechanisms feed into a narrative of “less freedom at home.”
- Social and political climates that portray wealth and success as antagonistic to the public interest can create psychological pressure.
Global competition & lower-friction alternatives
- Nations like the UAE, Switzerland, Singapore, Portugal, Greece, and others are actively offering low-tax regimes, golden visas, and favourable regimes for capital inflows.
- With capital and talent increasingly mobile, the threshold to relocate is lower for many.
The Laffer Curve effect (tax disincentive)
- The theory: beyond a certain tax threshold, incremental tax increases reduce total revenue because they discourage economic activity and drive people and capital away.
- In practice, when marginal tax rates become punitive, individuals and businesses will look for escape valves.
- (Hence the inclusion of that Laffer Curve image above.)
Let’s imagine a scenario in which policymakers, business leaders, and civil society decide: “We do not want to be a net exporter of our best wealth and talent.” What would need to change?
Lever | Policy / Strategy | Psychological & Structural Effect |
Tax reform with stability & predictability | Cut marginal rates on capital gains, dividends, and inheritance; fix brackets; guarantee no surprise “clawbacks” for a defined period | Reduces perceived policy risk; changes “hostile environment” narrative to “welcoming for growth” |
“Wealth-creator incentives” | Offer tax breaks for reinvestment, R&D, job creation; preferential regimes for family offices, scaleups; “novation zones” | Signals pro-growth posture; encourages staying and scaling |
“Exile reversal” programs | A “UK Returner” scheme - for those who left but want back, offer fast-track tax resets, seed support, or relocation bonuses | Recognizes that many departures are not absolute |
Slimming government, cutting waste, fiscal prudence | Real structural cuts in low-value public services, reorganize public sector, reduce “zombie” bureaucracies | Aligns rhetoric with policy: the state is not a bottomless spender |
Strengthen rule of law & guardrails | Tax rules with sunset clauses, transparent parliamentary oversight, charter protections for wealth treatment | Restores trust that tomorrow’s government can’t just undo everything |
Promote narrative, brand, culture | Emphasize UK as innovation center, culture, freedom, legal/finance infrastructure, open markets | Restores pride and identity - not just “tax trap” |
International tax coordination & competition | Negotiate favourable treaties, reduce double taxation friction, carve “friendly bilateral zones” | Lowers the comparative advantage of jurisdictions with simpler regimes |
Urban & regional development | Ensure that beyond London, other UK regions become compelling hubs (tech, life sciences, creative) | Distribute magnet zones so relocation isn’t “move abroad” but “move within the UK” |
Of course, to do all of this while maintaining fiscal balance is hard. But the point of this thought experiment is: you have to fight the trend on multiple fronts - not just patch at the edges with tax gimmicks.
If our hypothesis is right - that wealth outflow is not just a technical issue but a signal of underlying structural mismatch between governance and capital - then half-measures won’t work. You either lean into a pro-growth, trust-restoring agenda, or you accelerate decline.
