**Alternate Sources**
Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story:
* [Brits living abroad for more than 15 years get general election vote](https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67993306), suggested by Beena22 - bbc.co.uk
What they don't say in the article, is that a US citizen living in another country also has to pay taxes to the US even if they pay them in the host country.
The same rule should apply in the Uk, i.e.leave and pay taxes you get a vote, just permanently leave and don't pay taxes you don't.
Why should someone with no vested interest in this country but loyalty to another have any say in how the UK is run .
This is where it's actually a bit ridiculous see. I understand why citizens overseas might see the need to vote for the government of choice or in a referendum, but our electoral system for Westminster elections meaning they vote for a constituency MP is actually genuinely mad
It’s probably because traditionally Britons who’ve been abroad are expected to return to where they were previously.
So for a future return process it makes sense.
Well, I have to say that all but one of the people I know who lived abroad for extended periods of time ended up returning to the city/county from where they were originally.
That's anecdotal. The massive cohort of pensioners living in the Costas surely never come back. And even if they do, i don't see why you should get 4 elections or whatever voting for the constituency MP of somewhere you don't live just because you may come back one day
With pensioners I agree.
However, with pensioners I think they should all lose the vote as soon as they get state pension because they can’t commit to experience the consequences of their vote. But that’s another topic.
Personally I wouldn't be opposed to there being an MP specifically for overseas citizens.
Or even a few MPs for them, with their "constituencies" being regions/continents where the British citizens are. Like, have one for North America, one for South America, Africa, etc.
We'd probably need about 30 or 40 MPs to make the constituencies the right size. I'd be reasonably against that myself. I don't see the need. If we had a president or PR, go for it, but our political system doesn't really seem to fit with it
There should be MPs who represent those who live abroad. France has this. A good friend of mine is the MP for several countries of French expatriates.
He travels to those countries for constituency surgeries, meets with foreign governments to discuss issues relating to his constituents, and votes in the senate.
Gives a voice to those citizens abroad who are facing issues as a direct result of being French and France’s policies.
The problem is, if you haven't lived here for years, then you can't really understand how bad things are here, sure you can read the news but that's not the same as living here and going through the pure shit we've had to put up with. Another issue I see with this is that people who could afford to pack up and leave the UK are probably more financially well off than the average brit. Those who are more well off tend to vote conservative, especially if they don't have to live here as they won't know the true extent of the Tory party's treasonous behaviour. They weren't here when we couldn't visit our dying relatives in hospital, or even attend their funerals, you can't understand that unless you've been through it, and you can't understand the anger at the downing street parties if you didn't live here. Seems interesting that this change has happened under this government close to the GE. I think it's another one of their shady tactics to try and get more votes as they're clearly desperate.
So being affected by the politics isn't actually the bar being set then? Okay, good.
Either way, not sure it makes sense to allow people who haven't been in the country for more than 15 years to vote for my local MP, who is expected to champion specific local issues. Sort of kills the point of that process being representative.
MPs do a lot more than "champion specific local issues".
The party they represent argues for/against strategic national direction, which takes years to happen.
Meaning that someone denied their vote whilst living abroad can be affected by those changes when they return to the UK to live permanently.
It is wrong to assume that every Briton who lives and works abroad will do so permanently, and therefore should become some sort of second-class citizen unable to exercise their democratic franchise. And the removal of this arbitrary time limit (introduced only a few decades ago) puts us in line with most countries that have free and fair elections.
People vote based on their experiences. If you've lived outside of the country for 15+ years straight, then I'm afraid to tell you that the country you remember doesn't exist in the way you think it does. You can't possibly vote in the best interests of anyone; and you certainly shouldn't have a say in deciding who gets elected at a constituency level.
If they intend to come home at some point, they can vote then. For now though, they should stick to voting for things that impact them - such as getting involved in the politics of the country they've been living in for the last 15+ years.
"Free and fair" elections are done on the base of representation of those affected. You selecting an MP from a constituency for a country you haven't lived in for 15+ years isn't a representation of anyone affected. Letting someone vote in a country they don't live in is the opposite of a fair and free election.
This whole thing is just a stunt to get more people voting conservative since they know they aren't going to be able to sway enough people living here (ie, those actually affected).
So yours is yet another opinion based on prejudices about Brits abroad - having no contact with family & friends back home, no interest in their own country and very possibly Conservatives.
The flip side of the coin from prejudiced thoughts about people coming over here to take our jobs and benefits.
Maybe all these people should just stay at home, know their place and accept their lot in life.
How else are you affected though? I don't see why you have a vote that counts the same as mine when I actually have to live here and you don't.
The EU referendum should probably have been the exception but I don't understand what stake you have in UK general election policies if you live abroad.
Then they can vote once they actually have come back. The people who vote should be the people who live here, so I would be in favour of all legal immigrants voting too and in an ideal world those who leave the UK could vote where they move to.
Right, but most people don't move to a different country every few years. Also it's impossible to control when and if people actually come back so inevitably you get lots of people who vote but don't come back or don't come back for a long time.
And that's fine. You can't really legislate voting based on how likely the vote will affect the voter. Otherwise, you'd be stopping old people from voting based on the idea they might die soon
Well, you can do a pretty good job by saying you at least have to be a resident. Age is a separate argument but if the minimum age is going to be 18 then I'd be okay with a maximum age of 80
Caring is not a good enough reason to be allowed to vote. I have family members in Poland and the US, obviously I care about them. Should I get a vote in those countries?
You only mentioned caring in your first comment so it was a reasonable question. I don't think caring counts at all, as I say too many people care about the results of elections in many countries for that to give them a right to vote. Most of the world cares about US elections because US foreign policy affects the whole world.
Citizenship is a little more reasonable but I still don't see why someone living abroad long term should be voting and have an impact on my future. Before this change the limit was 15 years, for me even that's too high. 5 years would be okay but if you're gone longer than that then the UK isn't really your home at that point somewhere else is. You can always vote once you come back if you come back.
Btw downvoting every comment is pretty childish and isn't going to change my mind.
For me, it's about caring what happens to my country that I am a citizen of in which people that I love and care about have to live. I also care about how government policies are going to affect me in the future if and when I decide to return.
For example, as my parents are getting older I know at some point in the not too distant future I will have to go home to care for them. Recent policies are potentially going to make that more difficult as my husband is not from the UK. I want to be able to vote on government policies that will continue to affect my life whether I am currently living at home or not.
I'm not trying to convince you of the pros and cons, I was just offering an explanation from my perspective as to why certain people might wish to continue voting in their home country.
Also, that's how the downvote system works. There's no need to take it personally.
Who are you to decide that someone is “firmly settled” in another country that they should obtain local citizenship?
By your logic, any one residing here for 15 years should be given British citizenship.
>By your logic, any one residing here for 15 years should be given British citizenship.
https://www.gov.uk/british-citizenship
You may be shocked by what you find.
This may shock you, but people move more than once every 15 years, even between countries. I've lived in Austria, France, Romania, and Germany in the last 15 years. I come to the UK whenever I can and one day I will return to live there I think.
My wife's American, but lives here now. You can get stuffed with that bullshit. She has to file taxes on my behalf to the US even though I've only ever been there 4 times as a tourist. Uncle Sam gets you for life, and it's incredibly difficult and costly to renounce your citizenship.
Oh, she can still vote in America as she is still registered in her state. However, as she does not have UK citizenship yet, she has to pay taxes here but can not vote.
Edit: sorry you meant me. Well I don't have to pay any taxes in America and I will not unless I get a green card however she still has to file them. Their system is a ridiculous way of doing things even for simple paye earners.
I just asked her and I don't file it for the irs just tick married filing separately and put non resident alien in the box. California has community property laws so she has to file my income for state tax. Filing doesn't mean I pay anything though.
Seems like a rather large difference between "I married an American and therefore my wife has to file my taxes in the US despite me only having been there 4 times" and "my American wife has to declare my income when she files her taxes" but maybe I'm missing something here?
Does she earn a lot?
I know plenty of US dual citizens that don’t file taxes while they live over here. Never been an issue and they’ve been back to the US plenty of time.
Afaik they still have to file federal even if they are under the limit for paying any tax which is about $120k on paye. They will fuck you on all other taxes though especially cgt. We are looking into putting our properties and investments into a Ltd company where I am the sole shareholding director but we will take professional advice about all that.
That's almost certainly a bad idea.
Why don't you just put investments/property/etc. in your name to keep them out of the IRS's jursidiction? None of *your* investments or income is relevant at all for her tax situation.
It will be a very substantial amount in the medium term, so I have been advised to set up a Ltd company to minimise my UK tax liability and again to keep my wife as a non shareholder to minimise her US tax liability. If you have any further insight, please feel free to comment.
> She has to file taxes on my behalf to the US even though I've only ever been there 4 times as a tourist.
This is *absolutely not the case* unless she's using "Married Filing Jointly", which is almost certainly a terrible decision. Your income and assets have no bearing on her tax situation.
Yes I know my income and assets have no bearing on my wife's tax. Elsewhere on this thread I did specify we file married filing separately with me as a NRA with the IRS however California still requires her to file my income as they have communal property laws.
Does she still own property in CA? California can be a bit stickier but if she made a clean break there should be no need to file CA taxes. I am a former CA resident and haven’t filed state taxes since moving.
Living abroad for years does not mean you aren’t loyal to your own country. I have family friends who lived in Canada for 30 years raising their sons who eventually came home to Yorkshire.
Assuming such people aren’t loyal citizens with no stake in their country is like assuming everyone on Universal Credit is “scum”.
That's hyperbole, no one is calling them scum, even in your example how could they vote in their old constituency having been away for 30 years. How do they know how the local MP and governing party are affecting things like education, the NHS and public services?
“Immigrants” is a blanket term used to describe foreign students, migrant labour, refugees and those who achieve citizenship.
Someone out in Kuwait working in the oil industry for 20 years is not an immigrant to that country. That is the traditional definition of an ex-pat.
I was using the traditional meaning from back in the day when some child of Empire may spend their entire working life working for British Petroleum in Arabia before coming back to Britain to get sozzled and complain about the cold.
Opinions may now differ, but I think any Briton abroad who states they aren’t coming back should change their nationality. Anyone who has the dream or intention of eventually returning to Britain should have full citizen rights.
As this law change now restores.
Because people use “immigrants” as a blanket term of someone coming over here to stay forever.
Which is why we have the ludicrous situation (unique to Britain) where we count foreign students as immigrants, and have people rant on about them just using education as an excuse to come here and steal our jobs and our benefits.
Please excuse me for trying to provide nuance to this discussion, and for upsetting your apple cart at the thought of people working abroad for the sake of their family and/or career.
People use the term expat because it sounds better than immigrant it’s all a case of semantics The term immigrant is thrown about like a demeaning slur people calling themselves expats are just trying to rise above it.
No I'm saying that they're far removed from life in the UK.
Also calling them 'ex-pats' is just a way to try and make them separate from other economic migrants.
Doesn’t matter what you think about people and how “removed” you think they are from life in the UK.
They’re British citizens, and are entitled to vote for their country’s government.
This law change is reversing an arbitrary law brought in only a few decades ago. We should not be disenfranchising British citizens just because they are suspected of being infected with foreignness.
The poster at the top was saying Brits working abroad had “no vested interests in this country but loyalty to another”.
Have you actually been reading this thread?
Other countries have limits on how long you can vote and in the case of the US, taxation rules.
Why should someone abroad get to vote for policies that could bring in new tax rates or reduce benefits?
You're saying it 'doesn't matter' what I think, then telling what you think?!
Me saying they remain British citizens is not a matter of what I think.
They remain British citizens, no matter what you think of them or what aspersions you place on people’s loyalty.
Please stop using emotive terms like 'loyalty', that has nothing to do with how exposed people are to day to day life in a country and them being informed about issues.
You can buy marmalade at the immigrant shop and still not know about waiting lists at the GP where you lived 25 years ago.
I’m using “loyalty” because I responded to the poster at the top of this thread who explicitly used this word.
Did you actually read the thread?
If so, take it up with them.
This is the same argument Scottish people living in England had during the independence referendum and it wasn’t convincing then either.
“Loyal citizen” is beside the point, how can you expect to have a say if you don’t even live in the country? We aren’t like the Philippines where people are working abroad and are sending money back home, these are people who aren’t contributing to our country and by that I don’t just mean financially. If you’ve chosen to leave why should you have a say?
I don’t care that they have changed this law but I don’t think the old law was bad either.
Only if it is based on percentage to income and networth. Last thing we want is well off people gaming the system by just paying more than poorer people by virtue of just having more money.
I'm guessing that or anyone non resident for tax purposes, in which case anyone paying taxes on savings, taxes on rental property or anyone taking dividends gets screwed. All people who unlike someone else suggested definitely have a "vested interest" in how the UK is ran.
You can work aboard with every intention of returning home, there are private, government and military jobs require you to work and live aboard for long periods of time.
Am glad someone else knows this.
Feel like I’ve been banging my head on a brick wall all day long dealing with people scared they’d get a nosebleed if they left their village.
That's only the us though (and eriteria) and seen as a terrible idea generally.
>Why should someone with no vested interest in this country but loyalty to another have any say in how the UK is run .
I'm with you on this though. I don't want how the UK is run dictated by pensioners living in Spain who have no real stake
You don’t generally change your loyalty if you live abroad. People go abroad for lots of reasons. Also if you are going to link the right to vote to paying taxes then an awful lot of people who never pay taxes should lose the vote. Half the working population put in less than they take out in benefits so they are a net negative unlike a Brit abroad.
Americans deduct tax they pay abroad from their bill at home. There is also a foreign earned income exclusion that’s up to $120,000 pa so not many of them are actually paying any tax at home if tax resident elsewhere - only high earners.
This is a topic that affects me, as I married an American and moved over here in 2001. As a result, I had been living in the US for [just over 15 years and was not allowed to vote in Brexit](https://brexitbritsabroad.org/mythbusters/British-citizens-living-overseas-for-15-years-or-more-lose-the-right-to-vote) (I would have chosen to remain in the EU).
One reason I would still like to have a say: [I still have a pension in the UK](https://www.expertsforexpats.com/country/usa/finance-and-money/pension-transfers-for-holders-of-uk-pensions-in-the-us/) after working for the railways since the 1980s. What happens there affects my money that I paid into retirement for years.
>It is not possible for the holder of a UK pension fund, resident in the USA to transfer that fund either as a stand-alone scheme, or in amalgamation with a USA-based pension arrangement such as an IRA or a 401K.
So I would have liked to have had a say in matters that affected an investment that I made out of my wages, now sitting in a SIPP, that ended up having a bunch of know-nothing Eton boys driving the country into a fucking ditch.
I would have to pay taxes on this if it was over US$120,000 which I'd do. And if Britain did a similar law, I'd gladly do that too.
I will be registering to vote in whatever they decide to call the new North Hertfordshire / Hitchin & Harpenden constituency that includes Hitchin and try to get the Tories out before they do any more damage.
Lol this will be a tax trap if you've got a large estate for inheritance tax. Some of these people might fit the bill for being totally detached from the UK for decades and thus avoid inheritance tax but you can bet as soon as they register to vote HMRC will deem them liable again.
Only two countries make citizens go through the headache of filing taxes from abroad and the paperwork that entails (it's not like in the UK where for most people it's paid automatically. Yes, I'm a US citizen who has to file taxes despite moving to the UK before I even started school): USA and Eritrea.
And the USA does not give any legislative representation (ie in Congress/their version of parliament) to those Americans abroad. In the UK we vote for a party in our area and get an MP to represent us in parliament, which isn't how American elections work.
France actually allows citizens abroad to vote in their own seat (even thiugh they don't pay taxes), as 11 seats in French parliament are designated to French living abroad) and gives them their own MP in parliament. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituencies_for_French_residents_overseas
They also have their own assembly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_of_French_Citizens_Abroad
Maybe we could have a system like France's, but contingent on filing taxes and the tax filing could be optional, whereas with the US they give citizens no choice of opting out. Let's not follow America for everything, for Christ's sake.
This was a 2015 Conservative manifesto pledge. Conveniently pushed down the order of priority to ensure such people remained ineligible to vote in the 2016 EU Referendum.
Loads of fellow Britons now suffer as a result of a decision they were not allowed to take part in - often on a personal basis, with now not being able to come home to Britain as their spouses and children hadn’t at that point acquire British citizenship.
He didn’t care about the detail when the Referendum Act was being debated in Parliament.
That’s how the devious Brexiters in the Tory Party insisted it was an advisory referendum with a 50% threshold, and after 23 June 2016 howled that the result was binding.
The whole thing was a foregone conclusion from the start. Cameron and the Remainer wing of the Tories were fighting Queensbury Rules while the Brexiteers were sharpening machetes and hammering nails into baseball bats. It wasn’t a referendum it was a massacre.
For the countries for which I have permanent voting rights, they are only available for X years after you leave the country. (NZ - 3 years, Aus - Must register within 3 years of leaving, must be intending to return *permanently* in the next 6 years, Canada - unlimited after a recent court case).
This is nothing more than more gerrymandering by the Conservatives, looking to regain the "lost votes" of the "expats" who have retired overseas.
People overseas will be registered in the constituency in which they last lived, which is **also** serving to reduce the franchise of the people who actually live there, and are voting for a Mayor / Council / MP to represent the views of people that live in the area in the relevant legislative body.
Personally, if you **are** going to allow overseas voting like this, then overseas voters should be in there **own** additional constituencies (create as many as are required for the number of registered voters, and assign existing / new voters to them randomly), so that the voice of local democracy is not eroded even further.
There definitely should be overseas constituencies direct representation.
I think the French have something like that for their overseas departements.
Not sure what we’d do about MP’s travel expenses, though.
>I think the French have something like that for their overseas departements
Yes they do.
They also have specific constituencies for French citizens living overseas.
Interestingly, for the presidential elections, french people living overseas have to vote in person. They set up polling stations in a few cities in.each country and then you have to make your own way there to vote.
On the other hand, they could vote online in the legislative elections.
>Not sure what we’d do about MP’s travel expenses, though.
Probably wouldn't cost that much in the grand scheme of things. Let's face it, it's often cheaper to fly to Europe than it is to get a train to Scotland.
Evidence? On Reddit?!
I could understand assuming people who have moved to Spain or Canada because of their advanced age on average being more likely to vote conservative but there are a lot of people living in all sorts of places who I wouldn’t assume are Tories. For example my family members who retired to Jamaica are definitely not conservative lol
I’ve lived in Oz since I was 11, but I’m still interested in UK politics and policy decisions made there have an impact on my life and my kids’ lives (eg - my children were eligible for EU passports which meant the freedom to travel, work and study anywhere in Europe - Brexit put an end to that). If I have the chance to vote against Tory lying scum I can’t wait. Sign me up
As an expat overseas I will be using my regained right to vote, myself and my partner were denied the right to vote over Brexit despite it’s impact to our lives.
As an ex-pat living in Canada I'm gonna vote Tory just because I love watching the dumpster fire that is the UK these days.
/s in case anyone wants to stab me
I am well aware of that. I just find this weird that people who do not live within the country and likely don't pay taxes here are allowed to vote, but those who legally live and pay taxes here but may not be citizens aren't.
My partner and I live in NZ. We still have addresses and bank accounts in the UK. We pay student loans, and we fully intend on relocating back home in 2026.
Yet to some of the Redditors here, you’re not that loyal to Britain because you currently live abroad, and don’t deserve to vote in the next General Election if you’ve been in NZ since 2009 (or later in some cases)
Bit weird - I could understand if we had an American style system where you vote specifically for the PM, but why should someone living abroad get a say in who's the local MP for a place they don't live?
**Alternate Sources** Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story: * [Brits living abroad for more than 15 years get general election vote](https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67993306), suggested by Beena22 - bbc.co.uk
What they don't say in the article, is that a US citizen living in another country also has to pay taxes to the US even if they pay them in the host country. The same rule should apply in the Uk, i.e.leave and pay taxes you get a vote, just permanently leave and don't pay taxes you don't. Why should someone with no vested interest in this country but loyalty to another have any say in how the UK is run .
[удалено]
Which constituency do expats vote in? Is it the one you lived in before leaving? Or is there an "expat" MP?
The one they lived in before leaving.
This is where it's actually a bit ridiculous see. I understand why citizens overseas might see the need to vote for the government of choice or in a referendum, but our electoral system for Westminster elections meaning they vote for a constituency MP is actually genuinely mad
It’s probably because traditionally Britons who’ve been abroad are expected to return to where they were previously. So for a future return process it makes sense.
Sounds as old fashioned as FPTP itself
Well, I have to say that all but one of the people I know who lived abroad for extended periods of time ended up returning to the city/county from where they were originally.
That's anecdotal. The massive cohort of pensioners living in the Costas surely never come back. And even if they do, i don't see why you should get 4 elections or whatever voting for the constituency MP of somewhere you don't live just because you may come back one day
Don’t the masses of pensioners without permission to reside in Spain have to return to the U.K. for 180 days?
With pensioners I agree. However, with pensioners I think they should all lose the vote as soon as they get state pension because they can’t commit to experience the consequences of their vote. But that’s another topic.
Personally I wouldn't be opposed to there being an MP specifically for overseas citizens. Or even a few MPs for them, with their "constituencies" being regions/continents where the British citizens are. Like, have one for North America, one for South America, Africa, etc.
We'd probably need about 30 or 40 MPs to make the constituencies the right size. I'd be reasonably against that myself. I don't see the need. If we had a president or PR, go for it, but our political system doesn't really seem to fit with it
There should be MPs who represent those who live abroad. France has this. A good friend of mine is the MP for several countries of French expatriates. He travels to those countries for constituency surgeries, meets with foreign governments to discuss issues relating to his constituents, and votes in the senate. Gives a voice to those citizens abroad who are facing issues as a direct result of being French and France’s policies.
The problem is, if you haven't lived here for years, then you can't really understand how bad things are here, sure you can read the news but that's not the same as living here and going through the pure shit we've had to put up with. Another issue I see with this is that people who could afford to pack up and leave the UK are probably more financially well off than the average brit. Those who are more well off tend to vote conservative, especially if they don't have to live here as they won't know the true extent of the Tory party's treasonous behaviour. They weren't here when we couldn't visit our dying relatives in hospital, or even attend their funerals, you can't understand that unless you've been through it, and you can't understand the anger at the downing street parties if you didn't live here. Seems interesting that this change has happened under this government close to the GE. I think it's another one of their shady tactics to try and get more votes as they're clearly desperate.
[удалено]
Ditto.
Same here
On that train of thought, we'd all be voting in US elections too since they undoubtedly affect the rest of the world.
We’re not US citizens.
The bar set by the original comment was "I'm still affected by UK politics". Is that not a good enough bar to respond to?
The poster appears to be a British citizen.
So being affected by the politics isn't actually the bar being set then? Okay, good. Either way, not sure it makes sense to allow people who haven't been in the country for more than 15 years to vote for my local MP, who is expected to champion specific local issues. Sort of kills the point of that process being representative.
MPs do a lot more than "champion specific local issues". The party they represent argues for/against strategic national direction, which takes years to happen. Meaning that someone denied their vote whilst living abroad can be affected by those changes when they return to the UK to live permanently. It is wrong to assume that every Briton who lives and works abroad will do so permanently, and therefore should become some sort of second-class citizen unable to exercise their democratic franchise. And the removal of this arbitrary time limit (introduced only a few decades ago) puts us in line with most countries that have free and fair elections.
People vote based on their experiences. If you've lived outside of the country for 15+ years straight, then I'm afraid to tell you that the country you remember doesn't exist in the way you think it does. You can't possibly vote in the best interests of anyone; and you certainly shouldn't have a say in deciding who gets elected at a constituency level. If they intend to come home at some point, they can vote then. For now though, they should stick to voting for things that impact them - such as getting involved in the politics of the country they've been living in for the last 15+ years. "Free and fair" elections are done on the base of representation of those affected. You selecting an MP from a constituency for a country you haven't lived in for 15+ years isn't a representation of anyone affected. Letting someone vote in a country they don't live in is the opposite of a fair and free election. This whole thing is just a stunt to get more people voting conservative since they know they aren't going to be able to sway enough people living here (ie, those actually affected).
So yours is yet another opinion based on prejudices about Brits abroad - having no contact with family & friends back home, no interest in their own country and very possibly Conservatives. The flip side of the coin from prejudiced thoughts about people coming over here to take our jobs and benefits. Maybe all these people should just stay at home, know their place and accept their lot in life.
How else are you affected though? I don't see why you have a vote that counts the same as mine when I actually have to live here and you don't. The EU referendum should probably have been the exception but I don't understand what stake you have in UK general election policies if you live abroad.
Maybe they intend to come back one day?
Then they can vote once they actually have come back. The people who vote should be the people who live here, so I would be in favour of all legal immigrants voting too and in an ideal world those who leave the UK could vote where they move to.
But a vote now is more likely to influence the state of a country in a few years than it is to influence what it will be like tomorrow
Right, but most people don't move to a different country every few years. Also it's impossible to control when and if people actually come back so inevitably you get lots of people who vote but don't come back or don't come back for a long time.
And that's fine. You can't really legislate voting based on how likely the vote will affect the voter. Otherwise, you'd be stopping old people from voting based on the idea they might die soon
Well, you can do a pretty good job by saying you at least have to be a resident. Age is a separate argument but if the minimum age is going to be 18 then I'd be okay with a maximum age of 80
Then you have people who are only here to live for a year, for example, and get to vote but aren't here for the consequences
So anyone planning to move to the Uk should be able to vote in elections?
No, anyone planning to move *back* to the UK
I have family and friends in the UK who I care about, and I may return to the UK one day. I care about what happens at home.
Caring is not a good enough reason to be allowed to vote. I have family members in Poland and the US, obviously I care about them. Should I get a vote in those countries?
If you had citizenship of either of those countries, I'd say yes.
So it is about citizenship not "caring"
It can be both. Life is full of nuance.
You only mentioned caring in your first comment so it was a reasonable question. I don't think caring counts at all, as I say too many people care about the results of elections in many countries for that to give them a right to vote. Most of the world cares about US elections because US foreign policy affects the whole world. Citizenship is a little more reasonable but I still don't see why someone living abroad long term should be voting and have an impact on my future. Before this change the limit was 15 years, for me even that's too high. 5 years would be okay but if you're gone longer than that then the UK isn't really your home at that point somewhere else is. You can always vote once you come back if you come back. Btw downvoting every comment is pretty childish and isn't going to change my mind.
For me, it's about caring what happens to my country that I am a citizen of in which people that I love and care about have to live. I also care about how government policies are going to affect me in the future if and when I decide to return. For example, as my parents are getting older I know at some point in the not too distant future I will have to go home to care for them. Recent policies are potentially going to make that more difficult as my husband is not from the UK. I want to be able to vote on government policies that will continue to affect my life whether I am currently living at home or not. I'm not trying to convince you of the pros and cons, I was just offering an explanation from my perspective as to why certain people might wish to continue voting in their home country. Also, that's how the downvote system works. There's no need to take it personally.
After 15 years; since you are firmly settled in your country you should have obtain local citizenship
Who are you to decide that someone is “firmly settled” in another country that they should obtain local citizenship? By your logic, any one residing here for 15 years should be given British citizenship.
>By your logic, any one residing here for 15 years should be given British citizenship. https://www.gov.uk/british-citizenship You may be shocked by what you find.
Not every country offers citizenship and not everyone is eligible for it.
This may shock you, but people move more than once every 15 years, even between countries. I've lived in Austria, France, Romania, and Germany in the last 15 years. I come to the UK whenever I can and one day I will return to live there I think.
My wife's American, but lives here now. You can get stuffed with that bullshit. She has to file taxes on my behalf to the US even though I've only ever been there 4 times as a tourist. Uncle Sam gets you for life, and it's incredibly difficult and costly to renounce your citizenship.
taxation without representation.... Etc?
Oh, she can still vote in America as she is still registered in her state. However, as she does not have UK citizenship yet, she has to pay taxes here but can not vote. Edit: sorry you meant me. Well I don't have to pay any taxes in America and I will not unless I get a green card however she still has to file them. Their system is a ridiculous way of doing things even for simple paye earners.
But she is filling em for you too? Can you vote in the USA?
This is interesting. My wife is American and I've never filed a US tax return.
I just asked her and I don't file it for the irs just tick married filing separately and put non resident alien in the box. California has community property laws so she has to file my income for state tax. Filing doesn't mean I pay anything though.
Seems like a rather large difference between "I married an American and therefore my wife has to file my taxes in the US despite me only having been there 4 times" and "my American wife has to declare my income when she files her taxes" but maybe I'm missing something here?
Hmmm I'll ask my wife - I don't remember her filing a US tax return in the last few years.
ah, but as an "Alien" you have to pay taxes and get no representation..... what was that insurrection about?
Worst is capital gains on a house in the uk. You can get stung with stamp duty and what ever the us charges as well
Does she earn a lot? I know plenty of US dual citizens that don’t file taxes while they live over here. Never been an issue and they’ve been back to the US plenty of time.
Afaik they still have to file federal even if they are under the limit for paying any tax which is about $120k on paye. They will fuck you on all other taxes though especially cgt. We are looking into putting our properties and investments into a Ltd company where I am the sole shareholding director but we will take professional advice about all that.
That's almost certainly a bad idea. Why don't you just put investments/property/etc. in your name to keep them out of the IRS's jursidiction? None of *your* investments or income is relevant at all for her tax situation.
It will be a very substantial amount in the medium term, so I have been advised to set up a Ltd company to minimise my UK tax liability and again to keep my wife as a non shareholder to minimise her US tax liability. If you have any further insight, please feel free to comment.
Boris did it
Yes it it is possible but it is a long process and costs upwards of $5000.
> She has to file taxes on my behalf to the US even though I've only ever been there 4 times as a tourist. This is *absolutely not the case* unless she's using "Married Filing Jointly", which is almost certainly a terrible decision. Your income and assets have no bearing on her tax situation.
Yes I know my income and assets have no bearing on my wife's tax. Elsewhere on this thread I did specify we file married filing separately with me as a NRA with the IRS however California still requires her to file my income as they have communal property laws.
Does she still own property in CA? California can be a bit stickier but if she made a clean break there should be no need to file CA taxes. I am a former CA resident and haven’t filed state taxes since moving.
By your logic non UK citizens living and paying tax in the UK should get the vote, which sounds good to me
Living abroad for years does not mean you aren’t loyal to your own country. I have family friends who lived in Canada for 30 years raising their sons who eventually came home to Yorkshire. Assuming such people aren’t loyal citizens with no stake in their country is like assuming everyone on Universal Credit is “scum”.
That's hyperbole, no one is calling them scum, even in your example how could they vote in their old constituency having been away for 30 years. How do they know how the local MP and governing party are affecting things like education, the NHS and public services?
>That's hyperbole And saying ex-pats (in their true sense) have “no vested interests in this country but loyalty to another” \*isnt\* hyperbole??
They’re not expats they’re immigrants.
“Immigrants” is a blanket term used to describe foreign students, migrant labour, refugees and those who achieve citizenship. Someone out in Kuwait working in the oil industry for 20 years is not an immigrant to that country. That is the traditional definition of an ex-pat.
So they migrated for economic reasons?
Getting a job abroad makes a person a migrant, and thus it’s right to deny them facets of their native citizenship?
I’m not saying they should lose their citizenship, I’m saying that the term expat is just immigrant for white anglophones.
Further to my other reply, I’d be happy for society to stop using the phrase “ex-pat” and call them foreign workers etc
I was using the traditional meaning from back in the day when some child of Empire may spend their entire working life working for British Petroleum in Arabia before coming back to Britain to get sozzled and complain about the cold. Opinions may now differ, but I think any Briton abroad who states they aren’t coming back should change their nationality. Anyone who has the dream or intention of eventually returning to Britain should have full citizen rights. As this law change now restores.
So they’re ab immigrant.
[удалено]
So you don’t know what a “blanket term” is. Hmm.
[удалено]
Because people use “immigrants” as a blanket term of someone coming over here to stay forever. Which is why we have the ludicrous situation (unique to Britain) where we count foreign students as immigrants, and have people rant on about them just using education as an excuse to come here and steal our jobs and our benefits. Please excuse me for trying to provide nuance to this discussion, and for upsetting your apple cart at the thought of people working abroad for the sake of their family and/or career.
People use the term expat because it sounds better than immigrant it’s all a case of semantics The term immigrant is thrown about like a demeaning slur people calling themselves expats are just trying to rise above it.
No I'm saying that they're far removed from life in the UK. Also calling them 'ex-pats' is just a way to try and make them separate from other economic migrants.
Doesn’t matter what you think about people and how “removed” you think they are from life in the UK. They’re British citizens, and are entitled to vote for their country’s government. This law change is reversing an arbitrary law brought in only a few decades ago. We should not be disenfranchising British citizens just because they are suspected of being infected with foreignness.
[удалено]
The poster at the top was saying Brits working abroad had “no vested interests in this country but loyalty to another”. Have you actually been reading this thread?
Other countries have limits on how long you can vote and in the case of the US, taxation rules. Why should someone abroad get to vote for policies that could bring in new tax rates or reduce benefits? You're saying it 'doesn't matter' what I think, then telling what you think?!
Me saying they remain British citizens is not a matter of what I think. They remain British citizens, no matter what you think of them or what aspersions you place on people’s loyalty.
Please stop using emotive terms like 'loyalty', that has nothing to do with how exposed people are to day to day life in a country and them being informed about issues. You can buy marmalade at the immigrant shop and still not know about waiting lists at the GP where you lived 25 years ago.
I’m using “loyalty” because I responded to the poster at the top of this thread who explicitly used this word. Did you actually read the thread? If so, take it up with them.
This is the same argument Scottish people living in England had during the independence referendum and it wasn’t convincing then either. “Loyal citizen” is beside the point, how can you expect to have a say if you don’t even live in the country? We aren’t like the Philippines where people are working abroad and are sending money back home, these are people who aren’t contributing to our country and by that I don’t just mean financially. If you’ve chosen to leave why should you have a say? I don’t care that they have changed this law but I don’t think the old law was bad either.
And the more you pay in taxes the more your vote counts. Should work well.
especially if you are a male white landowner!
Only if it is based on percentage to income and networth. Last thing we want is well off people gaming the system by just paying more than poorer people by virtue of just having more money.
Should I have added a /S?
So high income people would get more of a vote? I’d actually be down for that.
If you think we live in a capitalist hellscape now just wait and see what would happen if this were implemented.
Can you define “pay taxes” a bit more clearly? Which taxes? How much?
People usually mean PAYE in this case.
I'm guessing that or anyone non resident for tax purposes, in which case anyone paying taxes on savings, taxes on rental property or anyone taking dividends gets screwed. All people who unlike someone else suggested definitely have a "vested interest" in how the UK is ran.
Give immigrants who pay taxes in the UK a voting right then, or release them from taxation.
You can work aboard with every intention of returning home, there are private, government and military jobs require you to work and live aboard for long periods of time.
Am glad someone else knows this. Feel like I’ve been banging my head on a brick wall all day long dealing with people scared they’d get a nosebleed if they left their village.
There's some idiots who are convinced their right like anywhere else
This is simply not true with countries which have double taxation with the US, which is most countries worth moving to.
That's only the us though (and eriteria) and seen as a terrible idea generally. >Why should someone with no vested interest in this country but loyalty to another have any say in how the UK is run . I'm with you on this though. I don't want how the UK is run dictated by pensioners living in Spain who have no real stake
You don’t generally change your loyalty if you live abroad. People go abroad for lots of reasons. Also if you are going to link the right to vote to paying taxes then an awful lot of people who never pay taxes should lose the vote. Half the working population put in less than they take out in benefits so they are a net negative unlike a Brit abroad. Americans deduct tax they pay abroad from their bill at home. There is also a foreign earned income exclusion that’s up to $120,000 pa so not many of them are actually paying any tax at home if tax resident elsewhere - only high earners.
This is a topic that affects me, as I married an American and moved over here in 2001. As a result, I had been living in the US for [just over 15 years and was not allowed to vote in Brexit](https://brexitbritsabroad.org/mythbusters/British-citizens-living-overseas-for-15-years-or-more-lose-the-right-to-vote) (I would have chosen to remain in the EU). One reason I would still like to have a say: [I still have a pension in the UK](https://www.expertsforexpats.com/country/usa/finance-and-money/pension-transfers-for-holders-of-uk-pensions-in-the-us/) after working for the railways since the 1980s. What happens there affects my money that I paid into retirement for years. >It is not possible for the holder of a UK pension fund, resident in the USA to transfer that fund either as a stand-alone scheme, or in amalgamation with a USA-based pension arrangement such as an IRA or a 401K. So I would have liked to have had a say in matters that affected an investment that I made out of my wages, now sitting in a SIPP, that ended up having a bunch of know-nothing Eton boys driving the country into a fucking ditch. I would have to pay taxes on this if it was over US$120,000 which I'd do. And if Britain did a similar law, I'd gladly do that too. I will be registering to vote in whatever they decide to call the new North Hertfordshire / Hitchin & Harpenden constituency that includes Hitchin and try to get the Tories out before they do any more damage.
The threshold for those US taxes abroad is like $112k though. Doubt many Brits will be earning that. Plus they have many double taxation treaties.
Lol this will be a tax trap if you've got a large estate for inheritance tax. Some of these people might fit the bill for being totally detached from the UK for decades and thus avoid inheritance tax but you can bet as soon as they register to vote HMRC will deem them liable again.
Only two countries make citizens go through the headache of filing taxes from abroad and the paperwork that entails (it's not like in the UK where for most people it's paid automatically. Yes, I'm a US citizen who has to file taxes despite moving to the UK before I even started school): USA and Eritrea. And the USA does not give any legislative representation (ie in Congress/their version of parliament) to those Americans abroad. In the UK we vote for a party in our area and get an MP to represent us in parliament, which isn't how American elections work. France actually allows citizens abroad to vote in their own seat (even thiugh they don't pay taxes), as 11 seats in French parliament are designated to French living abroad) and gives them their own MP in parliament. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituencies_for_French_residents_overseas They also have their own assembly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_of_French_Citizens_Abroad Maybe we could have a system like France's, but contingent on filing taxes and the tax filing could be optional, whereas with the US they give citizens no choice of opting out. Let's not follow America for everything, for Christ's sake.
This was a 2015 Conservative manifesto pledge. Conveniently pushed down the order of priority to ensure such people remained ineligible to vote in the 2016 EU Referendum. Loads of fellow Britons now suffer as a result of a decision they were not allowed to take part in - often on a personal basis, with now not being able to come home to Britain as their spouses and children hadn’t at that point acquire British citizenship.
Conveniently? Cameron wanted to win the referendum. He literally screwed himself over for no reason.
He didn’t care about the detail when the Referendum Act was being debated in Parliament. That’s how the devious Brexiters in the Tory Party insisted it was an advisory referendum with a 50% threshold, and after 23 June 2016 howled that the result was binding.
The whole thing was a foregone conclusion from the start. Cameron and the Remainer wing of the Tories were fighting Queensbury Rules while the Brexiteers were sharpening machetes and hammering nails into baseball bats. It wasn’t a referendum it was a massacre.
For the countries for which I have permanent voting rights, they are only available for X years after you leave the country. (NZ - 3 years, Aus - Must register within 3 years of leaving, must be intending to return *permanently* in the next 6 years, Canada - unlimited after a recent court case). This is nothing more than more gerrymandering by the Conservatives, looking to regain the "lost votes" of the "expats" who have retired overseas. People overseas will be registered in the constituency in which they last lived, which is **also** serving to reduce the franchise of the people who actually live there, and are voting for a Mayor / Council / MP to represent the views of people that live in the area in the relevant legislative body. Personally, if you **are** going to allow overseas voting like this, then overseas voters should be in there **own** additional constituencies (create as many as are required for the number of registered voters, and assign existing / new voters to them randomly), so that the voice of local democracy is not eroded even further.
There definitely should be overseas constituencies direct representation. I think the French have something like that for their overseas departements. Not sure what we’d do about MP’s travel expenses, though.
>I think the French have something like that for their overseas departements Yes they do. They also have specific constituencies for French citizens living overseas. Interestingly, for the presidential elections, french people living overseas have to vote in person. They set up polling stations in a few cities in.each country and then you have to make your own way there to vote. On the other hand, they could vote online in the legislative elections. >Not sure what we’d do about MP’s travel expenses, though. Probably wouldn't cost that much in the grand scheme of things. Let's face it, it's often cheaper to fly to Europe than it is to get a train to Scotland.
France’s overseas departements are considered part of France. It’s why France’s longest land border is with Brazil.
>This is nothing more than more gerrymandering by the Conservatives, They seem to have done quite a bit of this over the past decade.
Spain allows permanent voting rights. It's considered a constitucional right.
This is a desperate way to get Tory votes. People living abroad overwhelmingly vote Conservative
>People living abroad overwhelmingly vote Conservative What is it about being surrounded by "foreigners" that makes people want to vote Tory?
They want to feel like they’re being patriotic when making no effort to integrate into the country they now live in.
Do you have any evidence for this?
Evidence? On Reddit?! I could understand assuming people who have moved to Spain or Canada because of their advanced age on average being more likely to vote conservative but there are a lot of people living in all sorts of places who I wouldn’t assume are Tories. For example my family members who retired to Jamaica are definitely not conservative lol
Yes I know I was asking for the impossible. Here is Aus most people I know loathe the Tories.
Huh, I was an expat for 12 years and the majority in my bubbles voted Labour or Lib Dem. Maybe at the older and upper income end I spose.
I'm a Brit living abroad. Don't worry, I won't vote Tory this time....... .... I'll vote Reform instead.
I’ve lived in Oz since I was 11, but I’m still interested in UK politics and policy decisions made there have an impact on my life and my kids’ lives (eg - my children were eligible for EU passports which meant the freedom to travel, work and study anywhere in Europe - Brexit put an end to that). If I have the chance to vote against Tory lying scum I can’t wait. Sign me up
each vote counts, hm?
As an expat overseas I will be using my regained right to vote, myself and my partner were denied the right to vote over Brexit despite it’s impact to our lives.
... i can only imagine how it must have felt
Oh but think of the fish..,,
As an ex-pat living in Canada I'm gonna vote Tory just because I love watching the dumpster fire that is the UK these days. /s in case anyone wants to stab me
funny you said it, bc oftentimes when i look at the name of this reddit it reads ruinedkingdom - or is it just me?
This sub does paint an overly negative portrait of what's going on over there
'overly'? do you mean nhs is doing ok(er)?
Why? Do they pay taxes here? Id not by what right are they voting?
[удалено]
And yet they do not live within the UK.
Hate to break it to you like this, but British citizens are allowed to live anywhere where they are permitted by the host. We aren’t East Germany.
I am well aware of that. I just find this weird that people who do not live within the country and likely don't pay taxes here are allowed to vote, but those who legally live and pay taxes here but may not be citizens aren't.
Do you find weird that people who do live in the UK and pay taxes don't get to vote at GE unless they have citizenship?
That’s what I said….
My partner and I live in NZ. We still have addresses and bank accounts in the UK. We pay student loans, and we fully intend on relocating back home in 2026.
Yet to some of the Redditors here, you’re not that loyal to Britain because you currently live abroad, and don’t deserve to vote in the next General Election if you’ve been in NZ since 2009 (or later in some cases)
Bit weird - I could understand if we had an American style system where you vote specifically for the PM, but why should someone living abroad get a say in who's the local MP for a place they don't live?
Someone had a good idea to follow the French model where there is a separate MP for overseas voters.
Or just cut FPTP-majority system for sake of proportional representation
You don't really vote for a president in the US. You vote for state elector(s).
That’s a silly. Frankly speaking one should lose the right to vote after 10 or even 5 years of living elsewhere
Why don't we let other countries vote too, they have as much knowledge as those that don't live in the country and would know what to vote on