Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think a 2% wealth tax on the rich is unfair?

1000 replies

Mrspepperpotpot · 19/07/2026 08:05

i just saw an article and petition from oxfam saying if we taxed the ‘super rich’ 2% it would solve a lot of problems. They were suggesting 2% on anyone worth 10 million. Everyone in the comments agreed

I just don’t understand this mentality. High earners are hit at every turn. They usually use private health and private schools, pay the most tax, get hit with tax on savings, IHT, land tax, pensions etc etc Why on earth should people earn money to be taxed on it, to then be taxed on it again and again.

Why do people begrudge others having money when they’ve worked extremely hard to get it? Why isn’t there uproar about benefits instead?

I know this will never actually happen but the amount of people who seem to want it to is astonishing

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
DdraigGoch · 19/07/2026 23:59

Obanotters · 19/07/2026 08:27

All the high earners I know do. Early starts and late into the evening every day, weekends and whilst on ‘holiday’. How many low earners are working whilst on holiday?

This isn't about high earners, this is about those with a high net worth. Often not achieved by hard graft, just through capital gains.

randomchap · 20/07/2026 00:00

cupfinalchaos · 19/07/2026 23:16

Not goady, fact. You might find the fact goady.

Not a fact but thanks for your input.

AnonyMumAuDHD · 20/07/2026 00:13

Nesbi · 19/07/2026 21:50

@AnonyMumAuDHD - do you have wealth of 10 million plus? If not, your husbands high salary is irrelevant,

People earning high salaries are already paying a lot of tax. People with high wealth are, for the most part, not.

What the heck do you think ‘high earners’ spend their money on, if not assets? Wine, cigarettes and knock-off handbags? LOL

No, it goes one shares, pensions, savings, property (and previously kids’ school fees)… and yes, by the time he retires we expect to have around that much as he is in the top 0.5% of earners. We’re not far off now, after 35 years of working and saving and paying tax on the income. Those assets, that wealth, is purely derived from income from employment - no inheritance, no businesses, no playing with the stock market in our PJs. Just salaries and the homes that we’ve bought and developed.

We’ve got where we are from state schools with parents who never went to uni. We were the first. I started my life in a council flat, with a single parent mother on benefits and existing on free school dinners. But we were told at school that if you worked hard, went to uni, saved, invested in a home and a pension, it was the socially responsible thing to do to ensure you were not a drain on that society, that by paying our higher taxes we were contributing to an NHS and welfare state that protected the vulnerable. Now, we are being bludgeoned by every conceivable tax going because, for some reason, the life path we were encouraged to take makes us somehow reprehensible and not worthy of any compassion or empathy.

All of our friends, many who do have the £10m wealth you deride, are the same as us - state school educated, have worked 70-80hour weeks all their working lives, never had a penny from family or an inheritance. Just grafters who were careful with their money.

So, actually, my DH’s - anyone’s ‘high salary’ - is deeply relevant because we have ALREADY paid “a lot of tax” on it before accumulating that wealth. So, no, we don’t want to pay an additional 2% annual tax, thanks.

Pineapplesonpizza · 20/07/2026 01:05

How do you measure someone's wealth?
Money in the bank, paintings, jewellery, shares, owning a business that has good years and bad, money overseas, home value, land, Lamborghini? It's a non-starter.

Differentforgirls · 20/07/2026 04:46

EasternStandard · 19/07/2026 21:37

Ok I’ll google for you ; I usually don’t. Here you go.

The UK is currently experiencing a severe jobs crisis marked by a 5-year low in vacancies and rising unemployment. Young workers and graduates are hardest hit, with nearly one million 16-24 year-olds not in employment, education, or training. Firms are cutting entry-level roles due to rising labour costs, higher employment taxes, and economic strains

It’s lower in Scotland.

SeaShellsSanctuary1 · 20/07/2026 05:19

I know everyone has a different perspective but for me Gary Stevenson hits the nail on the head. The rich buy assets and with every asset bought it makes everyone else poorer.

20 yrs ago I lived next door to a rented property whose landlord owned 110 houses, thus removing housing stock and pushing rents up

Wilnis7 · 20/07/2026 05:38

IntoTheRoseGarden · 19/07/2026 23:35

Your are wrong. It is reported the Grosvenor Estate is worth £10bn and therefore on average it will be paying about £60m a year in inheritance tax and probably a bit less a year on income tax.

King Charles did not pay any inheritance tax on the private fortune he received from Queen Elizabeth II. This exemption is based on a 1993 Memorandum of Understanding signed with the UK Government, which ensures that assets passed from one sovereign to the next are exempt from the standard 40% tax rate.

he is a despot jealously guarding his ortune

Nellodee · 20/07/2026 06:09

Isn’t tax flight a myth?

Charlize43 · 20/07/2026 06:34

5128gap · 19/07/2026 22:54

Chin up. They'll probably be some billionaire paying for your retirement pension and your social care some time in the future, and they'll not want you either.

I've paid 40 year of NI contributions and taxes. And the government will expect me to sell my house to pay for my social care. I won't be as much a burden as those who have spent a lifetime sitting on their arses.

The Benefits system needs a huge reform and shouldn't be used as a lifestyle choice.

Goldenbear · 20/07/2026 06:59

SeaShellsSanctuary1 · 20/07/2026 05:19

I know everyone has a different perspective but for me Gary Stevenson hits the nail on the head. The rich buy assets and with every asset bought it makes everyone else poorer.

20 yrs ago I lived next door to a rented property whose landlord owned 110 houses, thus removing housing stock and pushing rents up

Isn't that what has happened in Manchester, the Offshore investor 'Mega Landlords' buying up all housing stock. In England (unsure how it works in the rest of the UK) we should put an end to this like Denmark did and have a no mega landlords housing framework that limits this possibility. Housing is about affordability and people not profits. Denmark is not a 'communist' country either. I have family there and it definitely works. Life is just easier there.

Owninterpreter · 20/07/2026 07:06

AnonyMumAuDHD · 20/07/2026 00:13

What the heck do you think ‘high earners’ spend their money on, if not assets? Wine, cigarettes and knock-off handbags? LOL

No, it goes one shares, pensions, savings, property (and previously kids’ school fees)… and yes, by the time he retires we expect to have around that much as he is in the top 0.5% of earners. We’re not far off now, after 35 years of working and saving and paying tax on the income. Those assets, that wealth, is purely derived from income from employment - no inheritance, no businesses, no playing with the stock market in our PJs. Just salaries and the homes that we’ve bought and developed.

We’ve got where we are from state schools with parents who never went to uni. We were the first. I started my life in a council flat, with a single parent mother on benefits and existing on free school dinners. But we were told at school that if you worked hard, went to uni, saved, invested in a home and a pension, it was the socially responsible thing to do to ensure you were not a drain on that society, that by paying our higher taxes we were contributing to an NHS and welfare state that protected the vulnerable. Now, we are being bludgeoned by every conceivable tax going because, for some reason, the life path we were encouraged to take makes us somehow reprehensible and not worthy of any compassion or empathy.

All of our friends, many who do have the £10m wealth you deride, are the same as us - state school educated, have worked 70-80hour weeks all their working lives, never had a penny from family or an inheritance. Just grafters who were careful with their money.

So, actually, my DH’s - anyone’s ‘high salary’ - is deeply relevant because we have ALREADY paid “a lot of tax” on it before accumulating that wealth. So, no, we don’t want to pay an additional 2% annual tax, thanks.

Is that each or joint? You might only be worth nearly 5 million each. Or is this new tax going to be a household rather than individual one. I cant quite work it out.

JimBobsWife · 20/07/2026 07:08

4Lightz · 19/07/2026 18:45

No, because it would be a drop in the ocean, but I give to small organisations who can do good work with the money. I would 100% support paying higher tax though, because then it wouldn’t be a drop in the ocean if everyone did it. And it needs to be wealth tax and capital gains. Increasing income tax wouldn’t work because many wealthy people don’t earn income. Although to be fair they did reduce the capital gains allowance to £3k from £12k, which helps a bit, but the rate is far less than income tax which seems backwards to me.

Do you agree with taxing inflationary gains? I would be fine with an index linked CGT. But that’s complicated hence the lower rate. It’s not ‘backwards’, it’s logical.

Nesbi · 20/07/2026 07:25

AnonyMumAuDHD · 20/07/2026 00:13

What the heck do you think ‘high earners’ spend their money on, if not assets? Wine, cigarettes and knock-off handbags? LOL

No, it goes one shares, pensions, savings, property (and previously kids’ school fees)… and yes, by the time he retires we expect to have around that much as he is in the top 0.5% of earners. We’re not far off now, after 35 years of working and saving and paying tax on the income. Those assets, that wealth, is purely derived from income from employment - no inheritance, no businesses, no playing with the stock market in our PJs. Just salaries and the homes that we’ve bought and developed.

We’ve got where we are from state schools with parents who never went to uni. We were the first. I started my life in a council flat, with a single parent mother on benefits and existing on free school dinners. But we were told at school that if you worked hard, went to uni, saved, invested in a home and a pension, it was the socially responsible thing to do to ensure you were not a drain on that society, that by paying our higher taxes we were contributing to an NHS and welfare state that protected the vulnerable. Now, we are being bludgeoned by every conceivable tax going because, for some reason, the life path we were encouraged to take makes us somehow reprehensible and not worthy of any compassion or empathy.

All of our friends, many who do have the £10m wealth you deride, are the same as us - state school educated, have worked 70-80hour weeks all their working lives, never had a penny from family or an inheritance. Just grafters who were careful with their money.

So, actually, my DH’s - anyone’s ‘high salary’ - is deeply relevant because we have ALREADY paid “a lot of tax” on it before accumulating that wealth. So, no, we don’t want to pay an additional 2% annual tax, thanks.

I have a fairly good idea of what high earners spend their money on thanks - mine gets invested (were you assuming I’m not a high earner?).

Not sure why you refer to “the £10m wealth [I] deride”? Where am I deriding anything? That level of wealth is amazing. Saying it should be taxed is not “derision”!

I’m also a bit confused why you are saying “So, actually, my DH’s - anyone’s ‘high salary’ - is deeply relevant because we have ALREADY paid “a lot of tax” on it before accumulating that wealth.” when my comment literally says “people earning high salaries are already paying a lot of tax”. I know this from first hand experience.

Putting all that to one side though, being “not far off” having £10m between you puts you in something like the wealthiest 32,000 households in the UK, but still short of the individual wealth that this tax would be aimed at. Also, the amount of tax an individual already pays (ie income tax on a high salary) would also count towards that 2%.

No need for you to panic just yet!

Nesbi · 20/07/2026 07:34

Pineapplesonpizza · 20/07/2026 01:05

How do you measure someone's wealth?
Money in the bank, paintings, jewellery, shares, owning a business that has good years and bad, money overseas, home value, land, Lamborghini? It's a non-starter.

Edited

Happens all the time when couples get divorced - just ask Jess Bezos!

BIossomtoes · 20/07/2026 07:37

Nesbi · 20/07/2026 07:34

Happens all the time when couples get divorced - just ask Jess Bezos!

It also happens for inheritance tax. Hence the art and jewellery on display in galleries and museums given to the nation in lieu of IHT when asset rich people die.

Donsyb · 20/07/2026 07:50

YonderlyYonderly · 19/07/2026 22:14

Lots? And what jobs do these people have?

I know lots of people on low/ lower paid jobs who work long hours and are stressed about work, doing a variety of jobs. Or people doing 3 jobs to make ends meet - that doesn’t leave much “downtime”. It’s not the preserve of the wealthy.

And what % of the ultra wealthy have inherited the bulk of their wealth? I’d be interested to know that.

This thread is as tone deaf as Kim Kardashhian telling people anyone can be successful if they “just work hard”…..

IntoTheRoseGarden · 20/07/2026 08:03

Wilnis7 · 20/07/2026 05:38

King Charles did not pay any inheritance tax on the private fortune he received from Queen Elizabeth II. This exemption is based on a 1993 Memorandum of Understanding signed with the UK Government, which ensures that assets passed from one sovereign to the next are exempt from the standard 40% tax rate.

he is a despot jealously guarding his ortune

The Grosvenor Estate is part of the wealth of the Duke of Westminster. Just to be clear, I was talking about the Duke of Westminster.

BIossomtoes · 20/07/2026 08:11

Isn’t it? There really isn’t any excuse for this. Workers in those companies must appalled.

Laurmolonlabe · 20/07/2026 08:16

Charlize43 · 19/07/2026 22:09

Maybe the wealthy could pay for people on welfare by sponsoring them? In exchange the unemployed could do a bit of gardening, cleaning, driving, cooking, etc.

I don't see why the tax payer should have to pay for people to sit around on their arses.

Well you are in the wrong country then, supporting people who are unable to find work or unable to do so is a fundamental principle in British life- I suggest you move to the USA where forced labour and slavery are still legal.

5128gap · 20/07/2026 08:25

Charlize43 · 20/07/2026 06:34

I've paid 40 year of NI contributions and taxes. And the government will expect me to sell my house to pay for my social care. I won't be as much a burden as those who have spent a lifetime sitting on their arses.

The Benefits system needs a huge reform and shouldn't be used as a lifestyle choice.

Andy Burnham plans that you won't have to sell your house to pay for your social care. So there's a bright spot.

Can you tell me what percentage of people see benefits as a lifestyle choice? I keep asking and no one has the figures. As you feel so strongly that these are the people responsible for our problems, I'm assuming you gave the data to show how many people are claiming just because they're idle and how much this costs?

ThingsAreNotWhatTheyWere · 20/07/2026 08:30

5128gap · 20/07/2026 08:25

Andy Burnham plans that you won't have to sell your house to pay for your social care. So there's a bright spot.

Can you tell me what percentage of people see benefits as a lifestyle choice? I keep asking and no one has the figures. As you feel so strongly that these are the people responsible for our problems, I'm assuming you gave the data to show how many people are claiming just because they're idle and how much this costs?

Good question. Although I don't deny they exist, I don't think they are as numerous as people like to believe!

LoftyPlumLion · 20/07/2026 08:30

IntoTheRoseGarden · 20/07/2026 08:03

The Grosvenor Estate is part of the wealth of the Duke of Westminster. Just to be clear, I was talking about the Duke of Westminster.

The duke of Westminster did not pay inheritance tax in approx 9 billion.

The whole country is a Ponzi pyramid scheme to keep our mafia in gold tiaras.

And the proles luv em gawd bless you ma'am

animalprintfree · 20/07/2026 08:31

I'm in this income bracket, fair or not, I would not be leaving the UK because of a 2% tax. There are lots of reasons why people might want to base themselves in the UK, it has certainly never been a tax haven so I don't think this will make a huge difference.

EasternStandard · 20/07/2026 08:33

5128gap · 19/07/2026 21:46

The forelock tugging remark was an individual response to a specific poster who had peppered the thread with insults to other posters, for their work, their intelligence and their ambition in their desire to defend billionaires.
This thread isn't about taxing high earners or the squeezed middle, VAT on private schools or NI contributions. Its about whether the 2% wealth tax is a good idea.
Because it doesn't matter which party is in government there's a great big hole in the budget that isn't going to be filled by getting the (unspecified number of largely anecdotal) lifestyle benefit claimants into work. Not while we have an aging population and disability increasing.

And yet those taxes had similar threads and posters adamant they were good to do and no downsides. Now all the VAT one has done is close schools and the OECD has criticised the NI hike.

Both taxes have done what some warned, but many including Labour ignored.

So is this another of the same? Highest tax burden rn, 90 separate taxes already, Labour going into every meeting looking for more taxes and no consideration of behaviour changes due to tax. They should at least consider why France scaled back their version of a wealth tax.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.