Zero Billionaires

Billionaires pay a lower effective tax rate than working households. We campaign for a ladder of reforms — from a 2% minimum tax on billionaires to a 100% rate above £770 million — that could raise £10–50bn a year, restore democracy and tackle climate breakdown.

~0.3% Effective tax rate billionaires pay on their wealth — less than working householdsZucman, G20 report 2024
157 UK billionairesSunday Times Rich List 2026
£784bn Held by the UK's richest 350 peopleRich List 2026 / High Pay Centre
75% Support wealth tax on assets above £10mYouGov 2025

The Crisis of Wealth Concentration

Fewer than 60,000 people (0.001% of humanity) control three times more wealth than the poorest 3.5 billionWorld Inequality Report 2026

How UK Wealth is Distributed

The top 1% hold 10% of all wealth—equal to the poorest 50% combined. The next 9% hold 33%, while the middle 40% hold 47%.ONS Jan 2025

The wealthiest 1% in the UK hold 23% of all household wealth (£800bn in assets) when accounting for wealth missing from official statistics.Resolution Foundation Official ONS data shows the top 1% holding at least 10% of wealth.ONS 2022
Wealth inequality is far more severe than income inequality. Latest UK wealth Gini coefficient: 0.59 vs income Gini: 0.35ONS Jan 2025ONS FYE 2024
UK billionaire wealth has grown from 4% of GDP in 1990 to 22% today. The richest 50 families now hold more wealth than the poorest 34 million people combined.High Pay Centre 2026
The ultra-wealthy are pulling away at unprecedented speed. Since the 1990s, billionaire and centi-millionaire wealth has grown at ~8% annually—nearly double the rate of the bottom 50%. The top 0.001% (fewer than 60,000 people globally) increased their wealth share from 4% in 1995 to over 6% by 2025.World Inequality Report 2026
~8%/yr

Annual real growth of billionaire-class wealth since 1995 — roughly 2.5× the rate of average wealthWorld Inequality Report 2026

22%

UK billionaire wealth as a share of GDP — up from 4% in 1990High Pay Centre 2026

£35m

Daily growth of UK billionaire wealth in 2024Oxfam 2025

Extreme Wealth Harms Economic Growth

IMF research spanning 159 countries demolishes trickle-down mythologyIMF 2015

Growth Impact: Bottom 20% vs Top 20% Income Share

Source: IMF, 159 countries. When the bottom 20%'s share increases 1%, GDP grows 0.38 points. When the top 20%'s share increases 1%, GDP shrinks 0.08 points.IMF 2015

The poor and middle class are the main engines of growth, not the wealthy. High savings rates among the ultra-rich reduce aggregate demand and harm overall economic performance.IMF 2015
Global income inequality mirrors wealth concentration. The top 10% of global earners take home more income than the remaining 90% combined, while the world's poorest 50% receive less than 10% of all earnings.World Inequality Report 2026

UK Social Mobility Crisis

UK

5 generations

To reach average income from poverty

Denmark

2 generations

To reach average income from poverty

The UK ranks 21st of 82 nations on social mobility—behind Spain, Germany, and the Netherlands.OECD

Democracy Captured by Wealth

In 2023, 66% of private political donations came from just 19 mega-donors — oligarchy, not democracyTransparency International UK 2024

UK Political Donation Concentration (2001-2021)

Just 10 men gave £106m—20% of all major individual donations over two decades. Four are billionaires with an average age of 70.openDemocracy

Political donations have grown 250% since 2001, reaching over £100m for the first time in 2019. Private individuals now account for 60% of donations in election years, up from 40-50%.Warwick University 'Super-donors' (£100k+) increased their share from 31% in 2017 to 45% in 2019.
20%

Of all major donations from just 10 individualsopenDemocracy

£115m

From unknown or questionable sources (2001-2024)Transparency International UK

63%

Of the public believe the very rich have too much influence on UK politicsWarwick University

£42m raised from donors alleged or proven to have been involved in corruption, fraud and/or money laundering. Between 2012-2023, a further £48.2m came from donors alleged to have bought privileged access, influence and/or honours.Transparency International UK
"Ordinary Americans' influence on policy outcomes operates at a non-significant, near-zero level while outcomes overwhelmingly favor very wealthy people."

— Princeton-Northwestern study of 1,800 policy proposalsGilens & Page 2014

Climate Breakdown Driven by Luxury Emissions

The richest 1% emit as much as the poorest 5 billion peopleOxfam 2023

Per Capita CO2 Emissions by Wealth Group

The richest 1% produce 110 tonnes CO2 per capita annually—nearly 70 times more than the bottom 50%.Oxfam 2023

Billionaire Carbon Footprint

Private Jets:
2,074 tonnes CO2 per year
Superyachts:
5,672 tonnes CO2 per year
Investments:
2.6 million tonnes CO2 per year

Investment emissions are 340× higher than personal consumption. Billionaires control $4.3 trillion in fossil fuel holdings.Oxfam

If everyone emitted like the richest 1%, the 1.5°C carbon budget would be exhausted in under 5 months.Oxfam 2023 Private jets emit 10-20× more per passenger than commercial flights and 50× more than trains.
Wealth concentration drives climate inequality. The top 10% account for 77% of emissions from private capital ownership, while the wealthiest 1% alone are responsible for 41% of such emissions. Meanwhile, the poorest 50% of humanity generate just 3% of private capital ownership emissions.World Inequality Report 2026

How Policy Choices Created This Crisis

Deliberate decisions since 1979 engineered extreme wealth concentration

Top Marginal Tax Rates: 1950-2025

1979

Tax cuts begin: Top rate slashed from 83% to 60%

1986

"Big Bang" deregulation: Financial sector grows from 100% to 450% of GDP

1988

Further cuts: Top rate drops to 40%—43 point reduction in 9 years

1980-1996

Privatization wave: £60+ billion in public assets sold, often below market value

2008

CGT collapse: Capital gains tax reduced to flat 18%, now 18-24%

Result: Top 1% income share doubled from 6-7% to 12-13%. Top 0.1% wealth share doubled from 4.5% to 9%. Income inequality Gini rose from 25% to 35%.World Inequality Database

What Leading Economists Have Found

The world's foremost public-finance economists have converged on two findings: the ultra-rich pay less than everyone else, and fixing it is now technically feasible

~0.3%

Effective tax rate billionaires pay on their wealth — a lower effective rate than middle-class workers in every country studiedZucman, G20 report 2024

$200–250bn

Annual global revenue from a 2% minimum effective tax on the world's ~3,000 billionairesZucman, G20 report 2024

25%

Share of their true tax liability the wealthiest 0.01% evade, versus ~3% for the average taxpayerAlstadsæter, Johannesen & Zucman 2019

The Zucman Blueprint: A Minimum Tax on Billionaires

In 2024, at the request of Brazil's G20 presidency, economist Gabriel Zucman (Paris School of Economics / UC Berkeley) published the first international blueprint for taxing the ultra-rich.Zucman, G20 report 2024 Its core finding: because billionaire income accrues mostly as untaxed capital gains inside holding companies, billionaires pay an effective tax rate of roughly 0.3% of their wealth — proportionally less than nurses, teachers and factory workers pay.

His remedy — a coordinated 2% minimum effective tax on wealth above $1 billion — would affect around 3,000 people worldwide and raise $200–250 billion a year, plus a further $100–140 billion if extended to those worth over $100 million. Only billionaires who don't already pay the equivalent of 2% of their wealth in income tax would owe anything.ICIJ 2024

G20 leaders responded in the 2024 Rio Declaration by committing to "engage cooperatively to ensure that ultra-high-net-worth individuals are effectively taxed".G20 2024

Enforcement Is Now Possible — the Research That Proved It

Zucman's The Hidden Wealth of Nations (2015) estimated that around 8% of the world's household financial wealth sits in tax havens. His subsequent work with Annette Alstadsæter and Niels Johannesen, using leaked records (HSBC Switzerland, the Panama Papers) matched to Scandinavian tax data, found the wealthiest 0.01% evade about 25% of the tax they owe — versus ~3% for everyone else.Alstadsæter, Johannesen & Zucman 2019

The crucial change since Europe's old wealth taxes died: automatic exchange of financial account information now operates across 100+ jurisdictions under the OECD Common Reporting Standard, ending the bank-secrecy era in which those taxes were designed.OECD Evasion, Zucman argues, is a policy choice — not a law of nature.

What Optimal-Tax Research Says About Top Rates

Piketty, Saez & Stantcheva estimate the revenue-maximising top marginal income tax rate at around 83% once all behavioural responses are counted — close to the rates the UK and US actually levied during their fastest decades of growth.Piketty, Saez & Stantcheva 2014

In The Triumph of Injustice (2019), Saez and Zucman documented that the 400 richest Americans now pay a lower total tax rate (all taxes combined) than the working class — the first time in a century.Saez & Zucman 2019

The idea has reached parliament floors. In 2025 France debated the "Zucman tax" — a 2% minimum on wealth above €100 million, affecting ~1,800 households and raising an estimated €15–20bn a year. It polled overwhelmingly well but was voted down in the National Assembly in October 2025; France instead renewed a 20% minimum income tax on very high earners.France 24 The fight moved from academic journals to national budgets in under two years — the UK can pick it up.

The Solution: 100% Tax Above £770 Million

A ladder of reforms ending in a hard cap — legally feasible, administratively viable, historically proven, and publicly supported

Annual Revenue

£8-12bn

From wealth cap alone

Affected

157 people

Out of 68 million

The Policy Ladder: From Minimum Tax to Wealth Cap

You don't have to back the cap to start climbing. Each rung raises revenue, builds enforcement capacity, and tests the sceptics' predictions against reality:

  1. A 2% minimum effective tax on billionaires The internationally endorsed first step: Zucman's G20 blueprint, aligned with the Rio Declaration. Billionaires who already pay 2% of their wealth in tax owe nothing extra — this simply ends the anomaly of the very richest paying the lowest rates.Zucman, G20 report 2024
  2. Progressive annual bands on wealth above £100 million Using the valuation and collection machinery designed by the UK Wealth Tax Commission.Wealth Tax Commission 2020 Independent costings for broader UK wealth-tax reform range from £10bn (IPPR) to £50bn+ a year (Tax Justice UK).Tax Justice UK
  3. A 100% marginal rate above £770 million — the cap In practice the cap operates as a high annual rate on wealth above the threshold: our revenue model applies 8% a year. Because 8% exceeds typical long-run investment returns, fortunes above £770m gradually decline toward the cap rather than being confiscated overnight. The 100% figure describes the destination; the annual rate describes the transition — and generates the £8–12bn a year.

How We Calculate £8-12 Billion Annual Revenue

Revenue projections are based on rigorous economic methodology and multiple verified data sources:

Data Sources:

  • Sunday Times Rich List 2026: 157 UK billionaires; the richest 350 hold £784 billion combined (published May 2026)STRL 2026High Pay Centre
  • Oxfam GB (Jan 2025): UK billionaire wealth rose by an average £35 million per day in 2024Oxfam 2025

Methodology:

  • Saez-Zucman methodology with Pareto coefficient of 1.4 for wealth distribution modelingZucman
  • 15% avoidance/evasion rate (consistent with strong enforcement in Nordic countries)Saez & Zucman
  • 8% annual wealth tax on amounts exceeding £770 million threshold
  • £300m administrative costs for 300-person HMRC specialized unit conducting 100% audits of 157 taxpayers

Result: Wealth above the £770 million threshold yields £8-12 billion in net annual revenue after accounting for enforcement costs and conservative avoidance estimates.

Note: £8–12bn is the campaign's own illustrative estimate using the methodology above. For independently published costings, see IPPR (~£10bn/yr from a 0.6% tax above £2m) and Tax Justice UK (~£50bn/yr from a comprehensive package) — both cited in the fact box below.

Broader wealth taxation could raise far more. The Wealth Tax Commission found a 1% annual wealth tax (paid over 5 years) on wealth above £500k could raise £260bn total, or £80bn from wealth above £2m.Wealth Tax Commission 2020 IPPR estimate £10bn per year from a 0.6% wealth tax above £2m.IPPR Tax Justice UK put the total from a comprehensive package at £50bn+ per year.Tax Justice UK
Global wealth taxation is both feasible and massively revenue-positive. A moderate 3% global tax on fewer than 100,000 centi-millionaires and billionaires would raise over $750 billion per year. Currently, billionaires pay lower effective income tax rates than middle-income households.World Inequality Report 2026

Current UK Wealth Taxes Are Inadequate

The UK already has some wealth-related taxes, but they're limited in scope and easily avoided:

£8.4bn

Inheritance tax (2024/25)—only 40% on estates over £325kIfG

£13.3bn

Capital gains tax (2024/25)—far lower rates than income taxIfG

No cap

The UK has no maximum wealth limit unlike historical precedents

What £12 Billion Could Fund Annually

87%

Of NHS maintenance backlog (£13.8bn)

87%

Of schools maintenance backlog (£13.8bn)

Annual NHS capital investment gap (£4.1bn)

Historical Precedent: High Rates Work

US GDP growth averaged 3.7% annually from 1947-1973 with 91%+ top rates vs 2.3% from 1980-2018 with lower rates.Piketty & Saez

Capital flight is real — but small, measurable and manageable. LSE/Warwick analysis of actual UK reforms finds migration responses among the super-rich are modest,Advani, Burgherr & Summers 2025 HMRC data recorded only a ~0.5% fall in non-doms after the 2024 reforms,Tax Justice Network / FT and long-run US studies find near-zero millionaire migration elasticities.Young & Varner, Stanford See Answering the Objections for the full evidence — including what we concede.
A wealth tax is feasible for the UK. The Wealth Tax Commission concluded that a one-off wealth tax would be feasible to design and implement. Implementation costs would be £600m-£3bn (around 1% of revenue raised), with the tax collectible over 5 years to ease cash-flow concerns.Wealth Tax Commission 2020

Answering the Objections

Every serious objection, stated at its strongest — with what the evidence shows, and what we concede. A case that hides the counterarguments isn't a case worth trusting.

"The wealthy will just leave the country."
The objection at its strongest

Capital and people are mobile. France lost wealthy residents under its old ISF wealth tax; a handful of prominent Norwegians moved to Switzerland after Norway raised its wealth tax in 2022; headlines warned of a UK "millionaire exodus" after the 2024 non-dom reforms. Tax them and they'll go — taking jobs and investment with them.

What the evidence shows

The most rigorous UK study — Advani, Burgherr & Summers (LSE/Warwick), using administrative tax data on actual UK reforms — finds migration responses among the super-rich are small: for the very wealthiest, tax changes barely dent lifestyles, and ties of business, family and status keep most people put.Advani, Burgherr & Summers 2025

The "exodus" headlines collapsed on inspection: HMRC data showed non-dom numbers fell just ~0.5% after the 2024 reforms,Tax Justice Network / FT and the widely cited "16,500 fleeing millionaires" projection came from Henley & Partners — a firm that sells residence-by-investment services — which later conceded the data didn't support an exodus.Tax Justice Network 2025 In the US, Young & Varner's analysis of every millionaire tax return over two decades found near-zero long-run migration; revenue from those who stay dwarfs revenue lost from movers.Young & Varner, Stanford

What we concede

Some responses are real. Scandinavian studies find measurable (if modest) migration among the wealthy,NBER 2024 and US estate taxes do shift where the very richest die. That's why the policy includes exit taxes on those who leave and international coordination — the G20 has already committed to cooperate on taxing ultra-high-net-worth individuals.G20 2024 Even under pessimistic migration assumptions, the tax nets strongly positive revenue.

"Europe tried wealth taxes and abandoned them."
The objection at its strongest

In 1990, twelve OECD countries levied net wealth taxes. Austria, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and others repealed theirs; France converted its ISF to a property-only tax in 2018. They raised little revenue at high administrative cost. Why would the UK succeed where a dozen countries failed?

What the evidence shows

The authoritative post-mortems — the OECD's 2018 review and Sarah Perret's analysis in Fiscal Studies — find those taxes failed for design reasons: thresholds so low they hit millions of moderately wealthy households, exemption after exemption gutting the base, self-reported valuations with no third-party data, and a pre-2017 world with no automatic exchange of bank information.Perret 2021Wealth Tax Commission

A billionaire-only tax is a categorically different administrative task: 157 taxpayers, 100% audit coverage, wealth held mostly in listed or valuable private equity, and information exchange now automatic across 100+ jurisdictions. Meanwhile Switzerland, Norway and Spain levy wealth taxes today — Switzerland's has run for over a century and raises more as a share of GDP than most of the repealed taxes ever did.

What we concede

The failures were real, and any UK design that repeated them — low thresholds, generous exemptions, weak enforcement — would fail the same way. That's precisely why the campaign follows the Wealth Tax Commission's design work and Zucman's minimum-tax architecture rather than resurrecting a 1980s-style tax.

"It will destroy the incentive to build businesses."
The objection at its strongest

Entrepreneurs create jobs, products and whole industries chasing the big prize. Cap wealth at £770m and founders will stop building, move their next venture abroad, or never start. Taxing the stock of wealth taxes the seed corn of investment itself.

What the evidence shows

The historical record is awkward for this claim: the US grew fastest (3.7%/yr, 1947–73) under top marginal rates above 90%, and the UK's post-war boom coincided with top rates of 83–98%.Piketty & Saez Piketty, Saez & Stantcheva estimate the revenue-maximising top rate at ~83% after counting all behavioural responses.Piketty, Saez & Stantcheva 2014

Micro-studies of actual wealth taxes (Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden) find the measured responses are dominated by avoidance and reporting changes, not real reductions in saving or enterprise.Jakobsen et al., QJE 2020Brülhart et al. 2022 And note the threshold: nobody builds a company differently because wealth number 771 million is taxed — the cap preserves the entire incentive landscape up to three-quarters of a billion pounds.

What we concede

Behavioural responses to wealth taxes are not zero — Norwegian and Swedish evidence shows reported wealth falls when rates rise, and some of that is real. Revenue estimates on this site already assume 15% avoidance/evasion. The honest claim is not "no effect"; it's "the effects are far smaller than the rhetoric, and mostly fixable by design".

"Wealth is illiquid — founders would be forced to sell their companies."
The objection at its strongest

A billionaire's wealth isn't cash; it's shares in a company they run. An annual tax on that stake forces them to sell down, lose control, or take on debt — punishing exactly the people still building things.

What the evidence shows

Billionaire wealth is overwhelmingly held in listed equities or large private companies with observable valuations — the easiest assets in the economy to value and to pay tax with.Zucman, G20 report 2024 Standard solutions already exist: payment in kind (transferring shares to the state, which sells gradually), deferral with interest for genuinely illiquid stakes, and multi-year collection — the Wealth Tax Commission's design collects over five years precisely to ease cash-flow.Wealth Tax Commission 2020

The irony: the ultra-wealthy already borrow routinely against "illiquid" shares to fund consumption without triggering income tax ("buy, borrow, die"). Assets liquid enough to borrow billions against are liquid enough to tax.

What we concede

Valuing large private businesses is genuinely harder than listed shares, and edge cases (family firms, farms) need carve-outs designed carefully so they don't become loopholes. That's a design problem with known solutions, not a refutation.

"They'll avoid it anyway — the money will vanish offshore."
The objection at its strongest

The ultra-rich employ the best lawyers and accountants on earth. Trusts, shell companies, offshore structures — whatever you legislate, they'll engineer around it, and HMRC will spend more chasing them than it collects.

What the evidence shows

Evasion is measurable — and a policy choice. Alstadsæter, Johannesen & Zucman matched leaked offshore records to tax data and found the top 0.01% evade ~25% of their taxes; but the same research shows enforcement works when governments act on information.AJZ 2019 Since 2017, the Common Reporting Standard automatically shares bank account data across 100+ jurisdictions — the single tool whose absence killed the old European wealth taxes.OECD

The proposal budgets £300m for a dedicated HMRC unit running 100% audit coverage of 157 people — an enforcement intensity no mass tax can match — and taxes wealth wherever it is held, with ownership of UK assets and citizenship-based rules closing the "move the money" route.

What we concede

Avoidance will never be zero — our revenue figures assume 15% leakage, in line with Nordic enforcement experience. And unilateral action is weaker than coordinated action, which is why the G20 track matters.

"This is confiscation — the politics of envy."
The objection at its strongest

People who built fortunes legally, paying every tax due, are entitled to keep them. A 100% rate isn't taxation, it's expropriation — and it makes society poorer in spirit: punishing success to soothe resentment.

What the evidence shows

No billion is built alone: every fortune rests on publicly funded infrastructure, education, courts, and — as this page documents — on effective tax rates below those paid by the workers in those companies.Zucman, G20 report 2024 The UK itself levied top marginal rates of 83–98% within living memory, decided democratically, without becoming a tyranny. Philosopher Ingrid Robeyns' work on limitarianism makes the positive case: beyond a point, extreme wealth buys not comfort but power over others — and democracies may legitimately limit it.Robeyns, Limitarianism 2024

Strikingly, many of the wealthy agree: Survation polling of 2,385 millionaires across G20 countries found 74% support higher taxes on wealth and 75% back a 2% tax on billionaires,Survation / Patriotic Millionaires 2024 and hundreds of millionaires have signed open letters at Davos asking to be taxed more.Proud to Pay More

What we concede

A 100% marginal rate is a radical position and we don't pretend otherwise — it's a claim about what a democratic society may limit, not a technocratic tweak. That's why the policy ladder starts with a 2% minimum tax that simply asks billionaires to pay what nurses pay.

"Billionaire wealth is paper wealth — there's no pot of money to spend."
The objection at its strongest

"£784bn" is mostly the market value of shares. You can't fund the NHS with Tesco stock, and if the state tried to sell £650bn of equities the prices would collapse. Comparing billionaire wealth to spending programmes is a category error.

What the evidence shows

Partly right — which is why the actual policy taxes a flow, not the stock: a few per cent a year, collectible in cash or shares, raising £8–12bn annually from the cap (and up to £50bn from the wider package). Governments routinely hold and gradually sell equity stakes — the UK did exactly that with its bank shares after 2008. No fire sale required.

And the paper wealth is far from inert: it's borrowed against to fund consumption, it compounds untaxed, and it confers the political and media power documented on this page. The World Inequality Lab estimates a moderate 3% tax on the world's ~100,000 centi-millionaires would raise over $750bn a year — all from "paper" wealth.World Inequality Report 2026

What we concede

Stock-versus-cost comparisons ("billionaire wealth could end poverty X times over") are illustrations of scale, not spending plans — we've labelled them as such on this page. The fundable claims are the annual-revenue ones.

Turning Off the Tap: Preventing Billionaires, Not Just Taxing Them

A wealth cap treats fortunes after they form. A deeper agenda — economists call it predistribution — rewires the economy so extreme fortunes stop forming at all. The two are complements, not rivals.

Redistribution Fixes the Symptom. Predistribution Fixes the Machine.

The concept comes from Yale political scientist Jacob Hacker: instead of letting markets mint extreme outcomes and correcting them with taxes afterwards, change the market rules so the concentration never happens.Equitable GrowthRoosevelt Institute The most authoritative UK statement is the IPPR's Commission on Economic Justice — business leaders and the Archbishop of Canterbury among its commissioners — whose organising principle was that the economy should "democratise wealth at its source, not simply redistribute it".IPPR, Prosperity & Justice 2018

A billionaire is not a natural phenomenon. Every ten-figure fortune is produced by a small number of identifiable machines — concentrated firm equity, monopoly rents, intellectual-property monopolies, financial engineering, land rents, dynastic inheritance, and a legal code that shields it all. Each machine has an off-switch, and each off-switch has serious scholarship behind it:

The machine that makes billionairesThe off-switchWho's behind it
Concentrated firm equityWorker board seats, employee ownership trusts, worker equity fundsPiketty; McGaughey (KCL); Warren; German codetermination law
Monopoly rentsModern anti-monopoly enforcementStiglitz; Open Markets Institute; Balanced Economy Project
IP monopoliesShorter, weaker patents; publicly funded researchDean Baker (CEPR)
Financial engineeringRestricting share buybacksLazonick (UMass)
Land rentsLand value taxationRyan-Collins, Lloyd & Macfarlane (UCL/NEF)
Dynastic inheritanceLifetime receipts tax; universal capital endowmentOECD; Piketty; Atkinson; Resolution Foundation
Legal shieldingReforming trust and corporate lawPistor (Columbia)

1. Share the Firm Before the Fortune Forms

Billionaires exist chiefly because founders and shareholders capture close to 100% of a firm's equity growth. Ownership-sharing splits that stream at source. Germany has required worker seats on company boards since 1976 — near-parity in large firms — and the evidence review finds no efficiency cost.Jäger et al., IZAHarvard Law corp-gov forum Elizabeth Warren's Accountable Capitalism Act proposed 40% worker-elected boards for large US firms; Piketty's Capital and Ideology goes to 50%.O'Neill on Piketty

The UK has already built the machinery. Since 2014, a founder who sells to an Employee Ownership Trust pays no capital gains tax — and hundreds have chosen to diffuse their wealth to staff rather than exit as centimillionaires (Richer Sounds, Riverford).EOTs Labour's 2019 Inclusive Ownership Funds proposal would have scaled the idea: firms with 250+ staff transferring 1% of equity a year, up to 10%, into worker funds paying dividends.People's Policy Project

The UK think tank dedicated to designing these models is Common Wealth, founded by Mathew Lawrence (co-author of Owning the Future).Common Wealth

2. Stop the Rents: Monopoly, Patents, Buybacks, Land

Much of what looks like wealth creation at the very top is wealth extraction — what economists since Joseph Stiglitz have called rent-seeking.Stiglitz The Balanced Economy Project's Davos report Taken, Not Earned traces how monopoly power sits behind most of the world's largest fortunes.Balanced Economy Project 2024Open Markets Institute

Dean Baker's Rigged puts numbers on the rules: patent and copyright monopolies, corporate-governance failures and financial-sector privileges redistribute possibly $1 trillion a year — 5% of US GDP — upward. No modern IP regime, no Microsoft-scale personal fortune; the alternatives are shorter, weaker patents and publicly funded research.Baker, Rigged (free download)PBS William Lazonick showed S&P 500 firms spent $2.4 trillion — 54% of profits (2003–12) — on share buybacks that inflate executives' stock-based fortunes; buybacks were treated as illegal market manipulation in the US before 1982. Restricting them is a direct brake on billionaire formation.Lazonick, HBR 2014

And the oldest rent of all: land. UCL research shows rising UK wealth inequality is driven principally by land values — property is half of all UK household wealth, and the top 10%'s property wealth is nearly five times the bottom half's combined. A land value tax captures gains no individual created.Ryan-Collins, Lloyd & Macfarlane

3. Rewrite the Legal Code That Shields Fortunes

Columbia law professor Katharina Pistor's The Code of Capital shows that wealth is "coded" into permanence by private law — trusts, corporate forms, bankruptcy priority — assembled by lawyers to shield assets from creditors, spouses, and tax authorities across generations.Pistor, Columbia Reforming trust law and asset-shielding vehicles is upstream of every tax on this page: it determines whether fortunes can hide and compound at all.

The public also has a claim before fortunes form: economist Mariana Mazzucato documents that taxpayer-funded research seeded most breakthrough technologies — the internet, GPS, touchscreens, key vaccines. If the state took equity stakes or royalties in what it funds, publicly created value would stop privatising into individual fortunes by default.Mazzucato, The Entrepreneurial State

4. Spread Capital at the Start — and Break the Dynasties

Prevention has a positive half: if capital ownership is broad from the beginning, no one needs to accumulate a controlling share of everything. Piketty proposes "inheritance for all" — a universal capital endowment of roughly €120,000 at age 25, so property circulates instead of concentrating.Piketty interview Hamilton & Darity's "baby bonds" — trust accounts at birth, scaled inversely to family wealth — moved from a 2010 academic paper to live US state pilots.Hamilton & Darity 2010Urban Institute The Resolution Foundation proposed a UK £10,000 citizen's inheritance at 25 — and Britain actually ran a small version, the Child Trust Fund, from 2005 to 2011.Resolution Foundation

At national scale: a citizens' wealth fund — a public fund holding a diversified slice of the market and paying every citizen a dividend. Alaska has paid one since 1982; had Britain saved its North Sea oil receipts as Norway did, it would hold a fund worth £500bn+ today. The IPPR Commission formally recommended one for the UK.Lansley & McCannPeople's Policy ProjectIPPR

On the dynastic side, the OECD itself — hardly a radical body — endorses inheritance taxation to "prevent the build-up of dynastic wealth", noting the share of inherited wealth in total private wealth is rising.OECD 2021 UK inheritance flows are set to double within two decades, while under a third of people expect to receive one — the next generation of extreme wealth will increasingly be born, not built.Resolution Foundation The favoured reform — from the IPPR and Resolution Foundation — is a lifetime receipts tax: tax what each person receives over a lifetime, not the estate, and use it to fund the universal endowment. Inheritance for the few becomes inheritance for all.

€120k

Piketty's universal capital endowment at age 25 — "inheritance for all"Piketty

$2.4tn

Spent by S&P 500 firms on share buybacks in a decade — 54% of all profitsLazonick, HBR

~$1tn/yr

Upward redistribution from rigged rules on patents, finance and governance — 5% of US GDPBaker, Rigged

£500bn+

The citizens' fund Britain would own today had it saved its North Sea oil wealth like NorwayLansley & McCann

40–50%

Worker board seats in the Warren and Piketty proposals — Germany has run near-parity codetermination since 1976IZA evidence review

Growth of annual UK inheritance flows expected within two decadesResolution Foundation

None of this is utopian — much of it already exists. Employee Ownership Trusts have been in UK law since 2014. Britain ran a baby-bond scheme (the Child Trust Fund) from 2005 to 2011. Alaska's citizen dividend has paid out every year since 1982. Germany has had workers on boards since 1976. Prevention isn't a thought experiment; it's a set of proven policies waiting to be scaled.
Why the cap still matters: predistribution rewires the economy for the next generation — but 157 billionaires already exist, and their fortunes compound daily under the old rules. Turning off the tap and draining the pool are the same project: while we build the preventive economy, those at the very top should pay at least the rate a nurse pays. That's the policy ladder.

What Billionaire Wealth Could Solve

The sums involved dwarf the cost of solving major social crises. These comparisons illustrate scale — the fundable claims are the annual-revenue figures above

The Scale of Solvable Problems

The UK's richest 350 people hold £784 billion (Sunday Times Rich List 2026). Global billionaires hold far more. Here's the scale of what such sums could achieve:

End Extreme Poverty Globally

$70bn/year

To lift 700m people out of extreme poverty by 2030UNU-WIDER 2024

End World Hunger

$40bn/year

UN World Food Programme estimate to achieve zero hungerUN WFP 2021

End Homelessness in UK

£19bn

Total cost 2018-2041 to end UK homelessnessCrisis UK

The scale is the point. The wealth of the UK's richest 350 (£784bn) is roughly 14 times the annual global cost of ending extreme poverty ($70bn ≈ £56bn). Wealth is mostly shares, not cash in a vault (see the objections) — but an annual levy converts a small fraction of it into £8–50bn of real public revenue, every year. This is not a resource problem; it's a political choice.

The Math: Billionaire Wealth vs. Global Problems

2.5%

Share of the richest 350's wealth needed to end UK homelessness (£19bn of £784bn over 23 years)Crisis UK

7%

Share of the richest 350's wealth to fund ending extreme poverty globally for one year (£56bn of £784bn)UNU-WIDER 2024

£39bn

Annual cost of child poverty to the UK economy — equal to 5% of the richest 350's wealthCPAG 2023

These crises persist by choice, not necessity. The total annual cost to end both extreme poverty and world hunger globally ($110bn ≈ £88bn) equals just 11% of the wealth held by the UK's richest 350 people. Yet homelessness, hunger, and poverty continue while UK billionaire wealth grew £35 million a day in 2024.Oxfam 2025

Cost-Benefit Analysis: Prevention vs. Management

Research consistently shows that solving these problems is far cheaper than managing their consequences:

  • Homelessness: £19bn total to end it (2018-2041) vs. £1.7bn councils spend annually just on temporary accommodationShelter 2023
  • Child Poverty: Costs UK economy £39bn annually—investment to prevent it would generate similar economic gainsCPAG 2023
  • Rough Sleeping: Intervention costs £1,426 per person vs. £20,128 annual cost of someone sleeping roughCrisis UK

Crisis working with PwC found ending homelessness would deliver benefits worth £26.4bn while costing £9.9bn over 10 years—a net benefit of £16.5bn. We spend more managing poverty than it would cost to end it.Crisis UK

Public Mandate for Action

Cross-Party Support for Wealth Taxation

YouGov polling (July 2025): 75% support 2% wealth tax on assets above £10m. Only 13% oppose.YouGov 2025

74%

Of 2,385 millionaires polled across G20 countries support higher taxes on wealth; 75% back a 2% tax on billionairesSurvation / Patriotic Millionaires 2024

250+

Millionaires and billionaires signed the "Proud to Pay More" letter at Davos asking to be taxed more (2024)Proud to Pay More 2024

78%

Prefer taxing richest over spending cutsIPPR

UK Leadership: Building an International Coalition

The UK has the diplomatic influence and economic credibility to lead a global coalition for wealth taxation—making capital flight impossible and inspiring systemic change worldwide.

Why the UK Must Lead

As a G7 nation, permanent UN Security Council member, and host of the world's second-largest financial center, the UK is uniquely positioned to coordinate international wealth taxation. Unilateral action alone won't prevent the ultra-wealthy from relocating assets—but a coordinated coalition will.

G20

Leaders committed to effective taxation of ultra-high-net-worth individuals (Rio Declaration, July 2024)G20 2024

OECD

Successfully coordinated global minimum corporate tax of 15% across 140+ countriesOECD

Platform

IMF, OECD, UN, and World Bank created the Platform for Collaboration on Tax in 2016PCT

The International Framework Already Exists

Recent breakthroughs in international tax coordination prove that collective action is both possible and effective:

2016

Platform for Collaboration on Tax: IMF, OECD, UN, and World Bank coordinate to combat tax evasionOECD

2021

OECD Global Tax Deal: 140+ countries agree to 15% minimum corporate tax—ending the race to the bottomOECD BEPS

2023

G20 Coalition Emerges: NGOs, economists, millionaires, and politicians call for coordinated wealth taxation of ultra-richEU Tax Observatory

2024

G20 Rio Declaration: Leaders commit to engage cooperatively to ensure ultra-high-net-worth individuals are effectively taxedG20 2024

Preventing Capital Flight Through Coalition

The main objection to wealth taxes—capital flight—evaporates when nations act together. The UK can lead a coalition of willing nations to:

Exit Taxation

One-time wealth tax on high-net-worth individuals who renounce citizenship or relocate assetsUN DESA

Information Exchange

OECD-led transparency initiatives enable automatic exchange of tax information across bordersOECD

Harmonized Rates

Coordinated minimum wealth tax rates prevent competitive undercutting between nationsEU Tax Observatory

The momentum is building. Spain, France, Germany, and Brazil have all expressed support for coordinated wealth taxation. The UK can either lead this coalition—or watch from the sidelines as others shape the future of global tax justice.EU Tax Observatory

Email your MP in under a minute

MPs track constituent correspondence closely. Enter your postcode, we'll find your MP, and you'll get a ready-to-send email you can personalise — grounded in the same evidence cited on this page.

Feel free to personalise — MPs' offices give more weight to messages that sound like you.

What if my MP uses a web form instead of email?

A small number of MPs prefer contact forms. If the "Open in my email app" button doesn't work for you, use the Copy button and paste the message into your MP's contact form at members.parliament.uk/FindYourMP.

The Evidence is Overwhelming. The Time is Now.

Extreme wealth concentration damages economic growth, captures democracy, accelerates climate breakdown, and eliminates social mobility. A 100% tax above £770 million has full legal authority, strong enforcement mechanisms, and overwhelming public support.

Bibliography

Every statistic on this page links directly to its source. The works below are the research spine of the campaign.

Core economics of taxing extreme wealth

UK feasibility and costings

Migration, avoidance and the objections

Democracy, climate and social costs

Prevention and predistribution

Politics, ethics and public opinion