The Sunday Times Rich List 2025: How Much Tax Do They Pay?

As the Sunday Times Rich List 2025 reveals Britain's wealthiest individuals, a dramatic tax revolution threatens to reshape the relationship between wealth and taxation. With non-dom status abolished and inheritance tax tightened, how are Britain's billionaires responding to the new rules of the game?

Before we delve into it all, here are the key things to note!

• The Hinduja family tops the 2025 Sunday Times Rich List with a fortune of £35.304 billion, followed by the Reuben brothers (£26.873 billion) and Sir Leonard Blavatnik (£25.725 billion).
• The UK government has recently abolished the non-domiciled tax status regime effective April 2025, affecting many ultra-wealthy individuals.
• Multiple billionaires including John Fredriksen and potentially Lakshmi Mittal are considering relocating from the UK following tax reforms.
• Sir James Dyson has vocally criticised recent inheritance tax changes that could cost his family business up to £120 million in death duties.
• Several Rich List members including Idan Ofer and Sir Jim Ratcliffe have previously relocated to tax-friendly jurisdictions like Monaco.
• Complex ownership structures using charitable trusts, offshore holdings, and foreign residency are common among the ultra-wealthy to minimise tax burdens.
• The 2025 tax reforms include a shift to residence-based inheritance tax and the elimination of the remittance basis for non-doms.

A Snapshot of Britain's Wealthiest

The Sunday Times Rich List continues to be dominated by the Hinduja family, with an estimated fortune of £35.304 billion derived from their global conglomerate spanning finance, energy, and real estate.

New Rules for the Ultra-Wealthy

The taxation landscape for high-net-worth individuals has undergone radical transformation. The most significant change is the abolition of the non-domiciled ("non-dom") tax status effective from just last month, replacing it with a residence-based system. Under the previous rules, wealthy individuals could live in the UK while avoiding tax on overseas income—a loophole exploited by many on the Rich List. But in the March 2024 Budget, Jeremy Hunt set plans in play to close this loophole.

Key changes include:

• Abolition of the Remittance Basis: Non-doms will now be taxed on worldwide income after four years of UK residency, eliminating a major tax advantage.
• Temporary Repatriation Facility: A transitional measure allowing non-doms to remit foreign income at reduced rates (12%-15%) between 2025-2028.
• Inheritance Tax Exposure: Long-term UK residents (10+ years) now face inheritance tax on global assets, not just UK holdings.
• Residence-Based Taxation: The shift from domicile-based to residence-based taxation aligns the UK with international practices but eliminates advantages that attracted wealthy foreigners.

While the majority of the population who don't own yachts will welcome these reforms, which championed as promoting fairness, there are concerns about a potential exodus of wealth and investment from the UK and this is something that could well be disastrous.

Now, let's break down how these Ultra-Rich handle their taxes.

1. The Hinduja Dynasty and their Complex Tax Structures

The Hinduja family's tax affairs exemplify the complexities facing multinational family businesses. Gopi Hinduja, the family patriarch, is UK-domiciled, while other family members maintain residences in Switzerland and Monaco, creating a diversified tax footprint.

The family has not escaped controversy. Prakash Hinduja faced tax-related convictions in Switzerland, and four family members were sentenced for worker exploitation, highlighting ethical dimensions beyond mere tax compliance.

The abolition of non-dom status has reportedly caused concern within the family, potentially impacting their UK tax position significantly.

The bottom line is that the Hindujas assert full compliance with tax laws, but their multinational structure illustrates how wealth at this level transcends national boundaries, creating opportunities for tax efficiency that ordinary taxpayers cannot access.

2. Property Moguls The Reuben Brothers' Offshore Strategy

David and Simon Reuben, second on the 2025 Rich List with an over £26 billion fortune, have built their wealth primarily through UK property investments. While they are domiciled in the UK, their business operations make extensive use of offshore structures, a practice that has drawn scrutiny but remains legal.

A spokesperson for the brothers has maintained that their businesses fully comply with UK tax regulations. However again, their use of offshore tax havens exemplifies how the ultra-wealthy can structure their affairs to minimise tax burdens while remaining technically compliant. This strategy is now under greater pressure from recent reforms.

3. Sir Leonard Blavatnik's Citizenship as Tax Strategy

Sir Leonard Blavatnik, ranked third with near £26 billion, exemplifies how citizenship can function as a tax strategy. Holding dual British and American citizenship, Blavatnik primarily resides in London. His previous use of non-dom status allowed him to avoid taxes on overseas income—an advantage now eliminated by the same 2025 reforms.

Blavatnik has faced scrutiny for "reputation laundering" through philanthropy, with critics suggesting his £128 million endowment to Oxford University aimed to overshadow controversial business practices. While not directly accused of illegal tax avoidance, his use of offshore structures and non-dom status has drawn criticism for enabling tax minimisation.

4. Sir James Dyson The Vocal Critic of Crackdowns

Sir James Dyson, fourth on the list with near £21 billion, has emerged as one of the most vocal critics of recent tax changes, particularly regarding inheritance tax. Labour's 2024 budget introduced a 20 percent inheritance tax on family businesses and farms valued above £1 million, which Dyson claims threatens the future of British family businesses.

Dyson's farming empire alone could face £120 million in death duties under the new rules. Despite previous controversy over relocating his company headquarters to Singapore in 2019 (a move widely seen as tax motivated), Dyson later returned his tax residency to the UK following public backlash.

His spokesperson emphasises that Dyson has paid over £500 million in taxes over the past five years, highlighting the significant contributions that wealthy individuals make to the UK treasury despite ongoing debates about tax fairness.

5. Idan Ofer The Strategic Relocator

Israeli billionaire Idan Ofer, fifth on the list with just over £20 billion, represents a clear example of geographic tax arbitrage. Ofer relocated to London in 2013, partly influenced by Israel's increasing tax rates. By residing in the UK, Ofer reportedly benefits from the Israel-UK Double Taxation Convention, saving approximately $300 million annually in taxes.

Ofer's relocation sparked significant criticism in Israel, where he was accused of tax avoidance by opposition politicians and media outlets. His case again illustrates how the mobility of wealth allows the ultra-rich to optimise their tax position by choosing jurisdictions with favorable tax regimes, something that may need revision following our non-dom rule changes.

6. The Weston Family Trust Structures and Tax Efficiency

The Weston family, ranked sixth with near £18 billion from retail ventures including Primark, demonstrates how trust structures can provide tax advantages. Their UK-based wealth is managed through Wittington Investments, which is majority-owned by the Garfield Weston Foundation, a charitable trust.

While there is no direct evidence of the family using non-dom status, their complex corporate structure involving trusts and holding companies has raised questions about tax efficiency. The family's philanthropy, with the Garfield Weston Foundation donating over £1.6 billion to charitable causes, has helped mitigate public criticism of their wealth and tax strategies.

7. Sir Jim Ratcliffe's Move To Monaco

Perhaps the most controversial tax case among the rich list's top 10 is Sir Jim Ratcliffe, whom is ranked seventh with £17 billion. In 2020, Ratcliffe officially changed his tax residency from the UK to Monaco, a move estimated to save him up to £4 billion in taxes.

Ratcliffe reportedly worked with PwC (Price Waterhouse Cooper's Accounting) on a tax minimisation plan that could save him and his senior executives billions. His move drew widespread criticism from politicians and the public, with Labour's then shadow chancellor describing his actions as unpatriotic and emphasising the impact on public services.

Ratcliffe's case highlights the tension between legal tax planning and perceived moral obligations to contribute to the society that enabled his wealth creation. This debate will be intensified by the recent reforms targeting such strategies.

8. Lakshmi Mittal The Potential Departee

Steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal, ranked eighth with over £15 billion, epitomises the potential consequences of the UK's tax reforms. Despite being a UK resident for nearly three decades, Mittal is reportedly considering leaving due to the abolition of the non-dom regime.

The new rules, including the removal of offshore trusts to avoid UK inheritance tax (levied at 40 percent), have prompted Mittal to explore relocating to more tax-friendly jurisdictions such as Switzerland or the UAE.

His potential departure highlights the practical challenge of risking losing major contributors to the economy.

9. John Fredriksen The Confirmed Exit

Norwegian-Cypriot shipping billionaire John Fredriksen, ranked ninth with over £13 billion, has already decided to move his private Seatankers Management operation out of the UK following tax reforms.

Fredriksen's departure directly responds to the abolition of the non-dom tax regime, illustrating the immediate impact of the new policies on London's status as a hub for international billionaires.

10. The Bukhman Brothers' International Mobility

Gaming entrepreneurs Igor and Dmitry Bukhman, ranked tenth with over £12 billion, represent newer technology-based wealth. Originally from Russia, they relocated to London in 2020 and also hold Israeli citizenship.

While there is no direct evidence of the brothers utilising non-dom status, their international mobility and citizenship portfolio again demonstrates how the ultra-wealthy position themselves to optimise their tax situations. Their decision to close Playrix's Russian office in 2022 further illustrates how geopolitical considerations interact with tax planning for global entrepreneurs.

So, what do you take away from all this:

1. Geographic Mobility - Billionaires can relocate to optimise their tax position, as demonstrated by Ratcliffe, Ofer, and potentially Mittal.
2. Complex Structures - From the Westons' charitable trusts to the Hinduja family's multinational arrangements, complex corporate structures facilitate tax efficiency.
3. Citizenship Portfolio - Multiple passports and residency rights create flexibility in tax planning, as seen with Blavatnik and the Bukhman brothers.
4. Balancing Act - Wealthy individuals must balance tax efficiency against reputation and public perception, with philanthropy often serving as a counterweight to tax minimisation strategies.