Rachel Reeves softened non-dom plans after Blackstone CEO ‘raised concerns’
Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.
| UK government / Treasury
Revealed: Head of world’s biggest asset manager lobbied chancellor on tax rules weeks before policy was tweaked
Rachel Reeves changed the government’s position on non-doms weeks after one of the world’s most powerful financiers asked her personally not to increase the tax burden on the super rich.
Documents released to openDemocracy under the Freedom of Information Act reveal Stephen Schwarzman, the CEO of leading asset manager Blackstone, raised “concerns” with Reeves about her plans to reform the tax treatment of non-domiciled individuals at a meeting in Downing Street in December.
The chancellor had previously used the autumn Budget in late October to re-commit to Labour’s manifesto promise to abolish the non-dom tax regime, which allows wealthy individuals who live in the UK to be domiciled elsewhere for tax purposes.
But around a month after meeting with Schwarzman, Reeves watered down this commitment.
Speaking at World Economic Forum in Davos in January, she announced that she had been “listening to the concerns of the non-dom community” and would soften the government’s plans.
The government blocked a request from openDemocracy for details of the discussion between Reeves and Schwarzman, as well as other meetings between senior ministers and major financial institutions, including BlackRock and JP Morgan, but has released a heavily redacted follow-up letter.
openDemocracy approached both the Treasury and Blackstone for comment, but neither had responded at the time of publication.
Reeves’ heavily redacted letter
Schwarzman and a senior lobbyist from Blackstone met with the chancellor and her top advisers on 5 December, as part of a series of meetings between the government and the finance sector.
The Treasury told openDemocracy that the meeting’s purpose was “to gather perspectives on the UK as an investment destination and how to strengthen the UK’s position as a world leading investment management hub”.
While the government has so far rejected openDemocracy’s Freedom of Information requests about what was discussed at the meeting, it did release a heavily redacted follow-up letter that Reeves sent to Schwarzman a week later.
Despite the redactions, the letter shows that the tax treatment of high-net worth individuals was a major topic of discussion between the pair.
“Dear Stephen,” the chancellor wrote, “It was my pleasure to meet with you last week. Thank you for your time and the ideas you shared on how I and the government may seek to achieve our ambitions for growth across the UK.”
A section titled “the tax regime for non-domiciled individuals” reveals that Schwarzman “mentioned concerns” about non-dom tax treatment and inheritance tax.
“You noted the significant contribution that non-domiciled individuals make to the UK and mentioned concerns around non-domiciled individuals leaving in response to the reforms announced at the Budget,” Reeves wrote.
“I want to reassure you that I do value the contribution that non-domiciled individuals make to the economy and want to encourage them to spend and invest more of their money in the UK.”
Reeves also used the letter to highlight that some non-doms will be able to “take advantage of a three-year Temporary Repatriation Facility”, a scheme created by the Conservative government that enables former non-doms to bring foreign income and gains into the UK at a discounted tax rate for the first three years.
Reeves also sought to assuage Schwarzman’s apparent concerns about the UK’s inheritance tax (IHT).
“New arrivals to the UK will benefit from 100% UK tax relief on their [foreign income and gains],” she wrote, “provided they have been non-UK tax resident for the previous 10 years.”
The majority of Reeves’ letter to Schwarzman was redacted, raising questions about what else the giant asset manager lobbied for during the meeting.
A Labour MP, who spoke to openDemocracy on condition of anonymity, said: “The chancellor needs to come clean about why she reversed the policy on non-doms. She was lobbied by Blackstone then the policy was quickly dropped.
“She had no similar response to pensioners or Waspi women when she decided not to fulfill their needs. Who’s side is she on?”
The government has also refused to release any records from a number of other meetings with leading financial institutions in response to a series of Freedom of Information requests by openDemocracy.
‘Listening to the non-dom community’
The previous Conservative government announced plans to phase out the non-dom system, which allows wealthy people who live in the UK but are domiciled elsewhere for tax purposes to only pay tax on money they earn in the UK, rather than on all their earnings.
Unveiling the plans in last year’s Spring budget, Tory chancellor Jeremy Hunt said there would be a two-year transition period in which existing non-doms would pay a reduced rate on their overseas income.
The following month, Labour went one step further, with Reeves promising that if elected the party would raise £2.6bn by closing “loopholes” in the plans to abolish non-dom exemptions.
The new chancellor repeated this pledge at the Autumn budget in late October. She said the non-dom tax regime would be replaced with “a new residence-based scheme with internationally competitive arrangements” and the transition period upped from two to three years.
Weeks after the Blackstone meeting, Reeves attended the gathering of the World Economic Forum in Davos, where she sought to reassure the international business community that the UK is an attractive place to invest.
She announced that the government would alter the policy, in effect allowing current non-doms to pay the reduced rate of tax on more of their earnings throughout the already-extended transition period.
“We have been listening to the concerns that have been raised by the non-dom community,” she said.
Many organisations and individuals have lobbied the government about the policy, including a group formed specifically to oppose the plans, the Foreign Investors for Britain, which has reportedly been in regular contact with No 10’s business adviser, Varun Chandra.
But an intervention from Schwarzman would carry considerable weight.
Schwarzman’s firm, Blackstone, is the largest asset manager in the world, controlling more than $1trn in assets globally. As CEO, Schwarzman’s personal remuneration package for last year was worth over $1bn, and a Forbes estimate in November 2024 put his net worth at around $53bn.
Schwarzman is a Republican donor who worked with the first Trump administration and backed the president’s re-election campaign in 2020. He said he would not support Trump at the 2024 election, calling on the party to “turn to a new generation of leaders”, but later U-turned on this to endorse the now-president.
Blackstone is believed to be the largest commercial landlord in history, holding huge swathes of residential real estate. In 2019, the UN’s special rapporteur on housing said in an open letter that the firm was “having deleterious effects on the right to housing” and accused it of “using its significant resources and political leverage to undermine domestic laws and policies that would in fact improve access to adequate housing consistent with international human rights law.” The firm disputed the contents of the special rapporteurs’ letter.
Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.
‘Grim News for the Planet’ as Arctic Sea Ice Hits Record Low
Original article by Julia Conley republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
“The environment does not care about politics. Keep spewing greenhouse gases and face the consequences.”
European Union officials said the Copernicus Climate Change Service had issued its latest “stark reminder of why climate action is urgent” when the bloc’s program announced that it observed less sea ice covering the Earth’s oceans last month than at any other point in recorded history.
In the Arctic, sea ice reached its lowest monthly extent on record, at 8% below average, in early February, and it remained below the previous record for the rest of the month.
The oceans were missing an area of ice roughly the size of the United Kingdom last month, according to Copernicus (C3S), and the finding was not an anomaly in recent sea ice observations.
February marked the third consecutive month in which record low sea ice levels for the corresponding month were observed in the Arctic.
C3S reported that in the Antarctic, sea ice levels have rapidly declined in 2025 after appearing to recover to near-record levels in December 2024.
Last month, sea ice near the South Pole reached its fourth-lowest monthly extent, at 26% below average.
C3S said the daily sea ice extent in the Antarctic may have also reached its annual minimum toward the end of the month, which will be confirmed later in March; if confirmed, it would be the second-lowest annual minimum in the satellite record.
“February 2025 continues the streak of record or near-record temperatures observed throughout the last two years,” said Samanatha Burgess, strategic lead for climate at the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. “One of the consequences of a warmer world is melting sea ice, and the record or near-record low sea ice cover at both poles has pushed global sea ice cover to an all-time minimum.”
The melting sea ice was recorded as global average temperatures rose 1.59°C (2.8°F) above the pre-industrial average last month, making it the third-warmest February on record.
In Europe, the temperatures that most exceeded averages were recorded last month in parts of Scandinavia, Iceland, and the Alps. Outside of Europe, “temperatures were most above average over large parts of the Arctic.”
The low extent of sea ice will lead to “more solar heat absorbed by the darker oceans,” and “faster warming,” said Simon Oldridge, a climate campaigner.
The loss of sea ice can also lead to the collapse of ocean currents that are crucial for marine life to thrive.
C3S reported on the record-low sea ice levels as campaigners in the U.S. and around the world condemned recent anti-climate actions taken by U.S. President Donald Trump and the Republican Party, including the country’s exit from the Paris climate agreement, the GOP’s passing of a bill to end a federal program aimed at reducing planet-heating methane emissions, and Trump’s push to fast-track fossil fuel projects—as scientists warn that new extractive projects have no place on a pathway to limiting planetary heating and avoiding its worst impacts.
“The environment does not care about politics,” said public health expert Ali Khan. “Keep spewing greenhouse gases and face the consequences.”
Original article by Julia Conley republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
- Water From Major Greenland Ice Melt Could Fill 7.2 Million Olympic Swimming Pools
- Melting of Greenland Ice Sheet Poised to Trigger Almost a Foot of Sea-Level Rise: Study
- ‘We Urgently Need to Change Our Way of Living,’ Experts Warn as Heat Wave Causes Historic Ice Melt in Greenland
- If all the ice in Antarctica were to melt, how much would global sea …
- Will the world ever be all under water? | AMNH
Lawsuit Aims to End ‘Cruel War on Our Environment’ by Trump and Musk
Original article by Jessica Corbett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
“Musk has shown that he can and will destroy a federal agency in a single weekend,” said one advocate. “If his deranged antics are allowed to continue, we might never be able to fix the damage to America’s environment.”
A leading conservation group filed suit Monday to stop U.S. President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk from “gutting” over a dozen of the federal government’s environmental agencies and departments.
This isn’t the Center for Biological Diversity’s first lawsuit targeting Trump’s Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency, but it is the first lawsuit in the country “challenging DOGE’s efforts to eviscerate the agencies charged with protecting the environment, natural resources, and wildlife,” according to a statement from the group.
The suit names as defendants the Environmental Protection Agency and departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Interior, and Transportation, as well as several entities under them: the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Federal Aviation Administration, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and National Park Service.
“The world’s richest man has created an alternative power structure inside the federal government for the purpose of controlling spending and pushing out employees.”
“Elon Musk and his hacker minions are tearing apart the federal agencies that protect our public lands, keep our air and water clean, and conserve our most cherished wildlife. The public has every right to know why they’re waging this cruel war on our environment,” said Brett Hartl, the center’s government affairs director.
“Musk has shown that he can and will destroy a federal agency in a single weekend,” Hartl added. “If his deranged antics are allowed to continue, we might never be able to fix the damage to America’s environment.”
The suit alleges “a flagrant violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which requires transparency, open public participation, and balanced representation when the president or executive branch agencies establish or use nonfederal bodies for the purpose of seeking advice or recommendations.”
Trump’s executive order establishing DOGE directs all agencies to form teams, or what FACA calls advisory committees, controlled by Musk. The complaint argues that “defendants have failed to ensure that the DOGE teams comply with the balance and openness requirements of FACA.”
“Mr. Musk and other billionaire and tech executives working with DOGE stand to benefit personally and financially from the DOGE teams’ work, including by securing government contracts, slashing environmental rules that apply to their companies, and reducing the government’s regulatory capacity and authority, including by targeting specific agencies, statutes, and spending decisions that affect their businesses,” the filing warns.
The complaint notes recent reporting that “Musk is using his influence over the DOGE teams to rapidly consolidate control over large swaths of the federal government, sideline career officials, gain access to sensitive databases, and dismantle agencies and regulatory systems.”
“Since President Trump assumed office—and without any congressional approval—the world’s richest man has created an alternative power structure inside the federal government for the purpose of controlling spending and pushing out employees,” the document adds. “Meanwhile, Musk has been named as a special government employee, which subjects him to less stringent rules on ethics and financial disclosures regarding his role overseeing DOGE and the DOGE teams.”
The new case calling on the court to require compliance with FACA comes after the center filed another federal suit in Washington, D.C. last Thursday with the aim of using the Freedom of Information Act to unveil details about what Hartl said “should be called the Department of Government Evisceration.”
It also follows U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, launching a probe last month into Musk’s official title. The congressman demanded answers from the White House by this coming Thursday.
Original article by Jessica Corbett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
- Ignoring ‘Science and the Law,’ Trump EPA Readies Chainsaw for Key Climate Finding
- ‘When Big Oil Says Jump, Republicans Ask How High?’ GOP Sends Climate-Killing Bill to Trump’s Desk
- Watchdog Warns DOGE Cuts to FAA Make Next Airline Disaster ‘More Likely’
- Climate Movement Alarmed by Trump Declaring Energy Emergency to ‘Drill, Baby, Drill’
- ‘A Disgrace’: Trump Admin Targets Multiple Environmental Justice Offices
‘No One Voted for This’: #TeslaTakedown Actions Pick Up Steam
Original article by Eloise Goldsmith republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
“We need an alternative to watching things unravel from our couches,” said one of the organizers behind the protests.
Protests at Tesla showrooms and dealerships that are united by the slogan #TakedownTesla are picking up steam—with over 65 actions planned around the country and in Europe through the end of this week, and dozens scheduled for Saturday alone.
Tesla, billionaire Elon Musk’s electric vehicle company, has become a site of resistance in the growing movement against the GOP megadonor’s central role in the second Trump administration.
Since Trump’s inauguration, Musk and the so-called Department of Government Efficiency have helped oversee punishing cuts to the federal workforce, infiltrated government agencies, and gained access to computer systems with sensitive personal information.
Because Musk is unelected, the protest movement urges people to make their voices heard as consumers—by selling their vehicles, getting rid of their stock in Tesla, and showing up to protest.
Already, protests have taken place in Devon, Pennsylvania; Berkley, California; Tucson, Arizona; Washington, D.C., and elsewhere. Signs at protests include messages likes “Musk is the Fraud” and “Tesla Funds Fascists,” in part a reference to Musk’s apparent Nazi salute during a post-inauguration celebration.
“No One Voted for This,” assert the organizing materials provided on the #TeslaTakedown website.
Actor and director Alex Winter, one of the core organizers behind the protests and the creator of the movement’s website, said that #TakedownTesla started on Bluesky between friends and activists and grew, according to Business Insider. It grew after Winter created the website to help centralize the effort.
“There have now been protests outside of Tesla locations in over 100 cities, and the movement is picking up speed and going global,” wrote Winter in a piece for Rolling Stone that was published on February 21.
“We need an alternative to watching things unravel from our couches, that inspires hope and shows that we still have the capacity to oppose those who want to tear the fabric of our society apart and extract their own benefit from the wreckage,” he continued.
Tesla’s stock experienced a bump after Trump’s election, but the company’s share price has plummeted more than 40% from it’s post-election peak in December, wiping out those gains. The tumbling of its stock meant that February was Tesla’s second-worst month on record, only eclipsed by the 37% loss the stock experienced in December 2022, according to Yahoo Finance.
In Europe, where Musk has promoted far-right political parties, Tesla sales have slumped.
On Monday, one observer shared a visual of Tesla’s stock declining and wrote “Turns out pissing off a good deal of the global population isn’t good for business,” along with #TeslaTakedown.
Original article by Eloise Goldsmith republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).