The United Kingdom is considering a new high-cost investor visa after a large outflow of millionaires followed the abolition of the non-dom tax regime. The proposal would require a £5 million investment and offer three years of residence with a path to permanent settlement, but it may struggle to compete with lower-cost and more tax-friendly options abroad.
The UK’s non-domiciled tax regime dated back to 1799 and allowed wealthy foreign residents to avoid UK tax on overseas income and capital gains for up to 15 years. It helped make London a major center for global wealth.
Non-dom residents were described as contributing around £8.5 billion per year to UK tax receipts. The previous Conservative government announced in March 2024 that the regime would end, and the abolition took effect in April 2025.
The change was presented as a fairness measure. The government projected it would raise an additional £2.7 billion per year by 2028. However, the transcript argues that the policy also signaled to globally mobile wealth that Britain was becoming less competitive.
Nearly 11,000 millionaires are described as having left the UK in 2024, with another 16,500 projected to leave by the end of 2025. The transcript notes that the exact number remains uncertain, but frames the outflow as a major peacetime wealth flight.
Examples of wealthy individuals reducing or ending UK exposure include:
- Norwegian magnate John Fredriksen
- Egyptian billionaire Nassef Sawiris
- Swiss fintech founder Guillaume Pousaz
Business Secretary Peter Kyle is described as having publicly admitted that higher levies drove some ultra-rich people out.
Rival Jurisdictions Are Competing for UK Wealth
While the UK has tightened its tax regime, other jurisdictions are actively targeting wealthy investors, entrepreneurs, and internationally mobile families.
The UAE offers zero personal income tax and has received a large influx of British residents.
Italy is courting wealthy expatriates with a €300,000 flat tax on global income.
Turkey has expanded its residency and citizenship programs, while President Erdogan is described as proposing a 20-year tax exemption on foreign income.
These countries are competing for the same investors and entrepreneurs that the UK risks losing.
The Proposed £5 Million Investor Visa
Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government is now considering a new investor visa through the Office for Investments, the Treasury, and the Department for Business and Trade.
The proposal would require a minimum investment of £5 million, roughly $6.7 million. In return, the investor would receive three years of residence and a direct path to permanent settlement, also known as indefinite leave to remain.
Qualifying investments would need to go into priority sectors, including:
- Science
- Technology
- Life sciences
- Advanced manufacturing
- Fast-growing UK businesses
Property would be explicitly excluded.
The structure is designed to avoid the criticism attached to the old Tier 1 Investor visa, which was shut down in February 2022 after concerns that it had been used to park suspicious capital, including Russian-linked money, in London real estate.
The new program is intended to direct capital into productive investment rather than property speculation.
How It Compares With Other Golden Visas
The proposed UK visa would be far more expensive than many competing investor migration routes.
Portugal’s Golden Visa starts at around €500,000 for fund investments.
Greece ranges from €250,000 to €800,000, depending on the route and location.
The U.S. EB-5 program sits at just over $1 million.
At £5 million, the UK proposal would be roughly ten times the cost of some competing golden visa programs.
Invitation-Only Structure
The proposed UK visa would not be a standard open-application golden visa. It would reportedly be invitation only.
That means investors would not simply apply by meeting a public checklist. Instead, access would depend on government pre-selection, relationships, sector alignment, and whether the applicant fits the kind of capital the UK wants to attract.
The government’s logic appears to be reputational control. By selecting applicants before they apply, the UK could try to avoid the due-diligence problems associated with the old Tier 1 Investor visa.
For investors, this creates uncertainty. Most golden visas reward applicants who meet objective criteria: invest the required capital, pass due diligence, and receive residence. An invitation-only model is less predictable and more dependent on access.
Political Risk
The proposal may face political resistance.
Labour has already faced pressure over a separate idea to fast-track settlement for high earners. That plan, described as a November 2025 proposal, would offer three-year settlement to visa holders earning above £125,000 per year.
If accelerated settlement for £125,000 earners is politically difficult, a £5 million investor visa may be harder to defend.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Migration and Citizenship Mike Tapp is described as involved in the broader effort. Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ November budget also hinted at a separate tax offer for high-talent individuals, but few details have been released.
A government spokesperson only confirmed that the global talent task force is keeping all options under review. The proposal therefore remains uncertain.
The Old Tier 1 Investor Visa Comparison
The old Tier 1 Investor visa started at £2 million and offered settlement after five years.
It also had accelerated tiers:
- £5 million for settlement after three years
- £10 million for settlement after two years
The new proposal effectively takes the old £5 million accelerated tier and makes it the entry point, removing the lower thresholds.
That makes the new version more exclusive, but also less competitive for investors comparing global options.
Main Challenge
The biggest question is whether the UK can win back wealthy people who have already left.
Many of the millionaires who departed in 2024 have already moved families, assets, schools, and business structures abroad. They may now be settled in Europe, Dubai, or other jurisdictions.
Convincing them to return for a £5 million invitation-only visa with a three-year path to settlement may be difficult, especially when rival jurisdictions offer lower taxes, clearer rules, cheaper entry points, or more predictable residence and citizenship routes.
The UK proposal is an attempt to recover investment capital after the non-dom changes, but its cost, political uncertainty, and invitation-only structure may limit its appeal. The practical question is whether Britain can still compete for global wealth after removing one of the tax regimes that made it attractive in the first place.
