Ineos founder Sir Jim Ratcliffe says he has lost confidence in UK economy
Ineos founder Sir Jim Ratcliffe has warned that high taxes and energy policy are damaging Britain's competitiveness, prompting a response from Labour over the billionaire's decisio
By BBC News
Sir Jim Ratcliffe has said he has lost confidence in the direction of the UK economy, warning that taxation, energy policy and other pressures are making Britain less attractive for investment.
The founder and chairman of Ineos, who is also co-owner of Manchester United, made the comments in a BBC interview in which he argued that the country was “on the slide”.
Ratcliffe identified taxation and immigration among his concerns and said conditions would need to improve before he considered returning to live in Britain.
He has been a tax resident of Monaco since 2020.
His comments prompted criticism from Labour Party chair Bridget Phillipson, who questioned Ratcliffe’s position while living in a jurisdiction known for its low personal taxes.
Phillipson said his decision to live outside the UK meant she took his criticism of the country’s economic direction with a “pinch of salt”.
The exchange comes as the Government prepares for the Budget on 28 October and businesses wait to see whether further changes to taxation will be announced.
Ratcliffe’s intervention is particularly relevant to Britain’s industrial sector.
Ineos has extensive manufacturing, chemicals and energy interests in the UK, including operations in the North West.
The company operates a major site at Runcorn in Cheshire through Ineos Inovyn, part of its global chemicals business.
Ratcliffe has repeatedly argued that high energy costs and taxation are making British and European manufacturing less competitive against operations elsewhere in the world.
Energy policy was again among his criticisms.
He described the Government’s approach to North Sea oil and gas investment as “insanity”, arguing that restricting domestic production leaves Britain increasingly dependent on imported energy.
That position reflects a wider campaign by Ineos against the current direction of North Sea policy.
Earlier this month, the company argued that accelerated decommissioning of North Sea infrastructure could damage domestic industry, employment and energy security.
Those arguments are disputed by supporters of a faster transition away from fossil fuels, who maintain that greater investment in renewable energy is necessary to reduce Britain’s exposure to volatile international oil and gas markets and meet climate commitments.
Ratcliffe’s broader criticism also comes amid debate about whether changes to Britain’s tax system are encouraging wealthy individuals and entrepreneurs to relocate overseas.
Several prominent business figures have moved their tax residence away from Britain in recent years.
The economic significance of those departures remains contested, however, particularly when individuals continue to own businesses, property or other investments in the UK.
Phillipson rejected Ratcliffe’s pessimistic assessment of Britain’s prospects and said the Government remained focused on economic growth while maintaining discipline over public spending.
She declined to speculate about individual tax measures that could be included in October’s Budget.
For businesses, the more significant question will be whether the Government can encourage investment while raising sufficient revenue to fund public services and manage the public finances.
That challenge is particularly acute for energy-intensive manufacturers.
Companies operating chemical plants, steelworks and other heavy industrial facilities have repeatedly raised concerns about British electricity and gas costs compared with competitors overseas.
Ineos has been particularly vocal on the issue because its operations span chemicals, manufacturing and oil and gas.
Ratcliffe’s latest intervention therefore goes beyond his personal tax arrangements or his ownership of Manchester United.
It forms part of a wider argument between government and industry over taxation, energy costs and whether Britain remains internationally competitive as a place to manufacture and invest.
With the Budget approaching, those questions are likely to remain prominent as ministers attempt to encourage economic growth while facing continued pressure over the state of the public finances.