Andy Burnham has been dealt a fresh blow as new research suggests almost one in three of Britain’s wealthiest people are considering leaving the UK amid growing concerns over tax changes and the economy. The latest Saltus Wealth Index Report found that 30% of high net worth individuals could consider moving abroad, with 8% actively exploring a permanent move within the next 12 months. Mike Stimpson, partner at Saltus, said the research showed a significant shift in attitudes towards leaving Britain.

“People do not uproot their lives over a single tax announcement, and our research does not suggest that Britain’s wealth creators are heading for the exits en masse,” he said.

“What it does show, however, is a marked change in the way people are thinking. Leaving the UK has moved from a distant idea to something that a growing minority are actively testing against their family, financial and personal circumstances.”

The report found that confidence in the UK economy among wealthy respondents had fallen over the past year, while 40% identified tax changes as a key risk to their wealth. Concerns about pensions and Inheritance Tax were also prominent, with many respondents worried about the prospect of further changes affecting their finances.

Henrietta Grimston, a chartered financial planner at Saltus, said she had seen more clients asking whether moving abroad was a viable option. “I have seen a substantial increase in clients querying the viability of a move abroad, with a clear goal being to reduce future Inheritance Tax concerns,” she said.

She added that some wealthy individuals had family connections or existing rights to live overseas, while others were exploring countries offering residency options to investors. However, Ms Grimston warned that relocating was not always straightforward, with access to healthcare, favourable tax arrangements and proximity to family all important considerations.

“The reality of missing out on time with family, particularly seeing grandchildren grow up or moving away from parents who may still be dependent, is a tough emotional decision to make,” she said.

Despite the growing interest in moving abroad, the research does not point to an imminent mass departure, with 70% of respondents saying they had no plans to leave the UK.

For those considering a move, the European Union was the preferred destination, while Spain and the United States were the most popular individual country choices.

The findings are based on a survey of 2,000 UK adults with at least £250,000 in investable assets, excluding their main home. The research was conducted by Censuswide in August 2026.

Andy Burnham’s Clash with Working Britain: Could Labour’s Policies Deepen the Divide?

Andy Burnham has become the focus of renewed political debate as questions grow over Labour’s relationship with working people, the cost of living and the future direction of the party. The dramatic claim that Burnham has “declared war” on workers captures the anger expressed by some critics, but whether Labour has genuinely lost the confidence of everyone in employment is a much broader question.

For many households, politics is judged less by speeches and party slogans than by what remains in their bank accounts at the end of the month. Housing costs, energy bills, transport expenses, taxes and childcare all influence how people assess the government. If workers believe their wages are failing to keep pace with their expenses, frustration can quickly become a political issue.

Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, has frequently been associated with debates about public services, regional inequality and the role of government in improving living standards. His political approach and any proposals linked to him can therefore attract attention from people who believe the state should do more to support communities, as well as from those concerned about the cost of funding public programmes.

The pressure on working households

Britain’s working population is far from a single political group. Employees on lower wages, skilled tradespeople, public-sector workers, professionals, small-business owners and higher earners can have very different priorities. A policy that helps one household may impose costs or create concerns for another.

For workers facing high rents and expensive essentials, investment in housing, transport and public services may offer tangible benefits. Better public transport can reduce commuting costs, while access to affordable childcare can make employment more practical for parents. Reliable healthcare and education can also improve family security.

However, the funding of these services matters. Workers who pay income tax, national insurance, council tax and other charges may question whether additional spending will deliver results that justify its cost. People who feel they are contributing more without receiving better services may become increasingly sceptical of government promises.

This creates a difficult political challenge for Labour. The party must demonstrate that its plans improve everyday life while explaining how those plans will be paid for. If the benefits appear distant but the costs are immediate, public dissatisfaction can grow.

Tax, employment and the small-business question

Taxation is particularly sensitive because it affects people in different ways. Employees may worry about the amount deducted from their earnings, while employers consider the cost of hiring staff, increasing wages and expanding their businesses.

Small businesses can be especially concerned about rising operating costs. A local shop, restaurant or construction company may have less financial flexibility than a large corporation. When employment becomes more expensive, businesses may respond by reducing recruitment, raising prices, limiting investment or absorbing the additional costs themselves.

Yet the effects depend on the specific measure, the size of the business and wider economic conditions. It would be misleading to assume that every tax increase necessarily destroys jobs or that every reduction automatically creates employment. The important questions are how a policy is designed, who pays for it and what evidence shows about its effects.

For Burnham and Labour, the broader issue is whether economic policy can support public services and protect living standards without placing disproportionate pressure on workers and employers. Critics may argue that the balance is wrong; supporters may contend that investment and stronger protections can produce longer-term benefits.

Those competing arguments should be judged against the details of actual proposals rather than slogans alone.

Why political trust matters

Political loyalty is not permanent. Voters who support a party at one election may change their minds if they feel that its priorities no longer reflect their lives. Equally, dissatisfaction with one policy does not necessarily mean that a voter will abandon the party altogether.

For some working households, wages and taxation are decisive. Others place greater emphasis on the NHS, immigration, housing, crime, pensions or the environment. Many consider several issues together when deciding how to vote.

This makes the assertion that nobody with a job will ever vote Labour again an exaggeration rather than an established fact. Workers are not politically uniform, and a headline cannot demonstrate how millions of individuals intend to vote. Reliable polling, election results and detailed research into voting behaviour are needed to assess the scale and nature of any shift.

Nevertheless, the language of political anger can reveal a genuine concern: some voters feel that the economic system is not rewarding their work as they expected. When people believe that employment no longer provides sufficient security or a realistic route to improving their lives, they may become receptive to parties promising a different approach.

Burnham’s position in the wider Labour debate

Burnham’s political significance extends beyond Manchester because his views are often discussed in connection with Labour’s wider future. Questions about economic fairness, public spending, regional investment and relations with business are central to debates over the party’s identity.

But it is important to distinguish Burnham’s personal position from decisions made by the national government. As mayor, he has responsibilities and powers that differ from those of a prime minister or chancellor. National tax rules, welfare policy and many employment regulations are determined at Westminster, while a mayor’s influence depends on devolved powers, local funding and cooperation with central government.

Any claim that Burnham has announced a particular policy or directly targeted working people should therefore be assessed against his actual words, the policy document involved and the powers available to him. Without that context, a political disagreement can easily be portrayed as a more sweeping confrontation than the evidence supports.

What workers will be looking for

For Labour, the practical test is whether people can see improvements in their daily lives. Workers will want to know whether wages are rising, whether bills are manageable, whether public services are accessible and whether employment offers a reasonable degree of security.

They will also expect clear explanations of how policies affect take-home pay and business costs. Broad promises about fairness may not be persuasive if households cannot see how those promises translate into their own circumstances. Conversely, proposals that deliver measurable improvements could strengthen confidence among people who are currently dissatisfied.

Burnham and other Labour figures will also face scrutiny over whether their plans are affordable, realistic and consistent with the responsibilities of their offices. Critics should be able to challenge those plans, while supporters should be able to explain their intended benefits. Transparent figures and independently assessable outcomes are more useful than claims that an entire group of voters has already made up its mind.

A political warning, not a settled verdict

The suggestion that working Britain will never vote Labour again reflects the intensity of the argument surrounding the party’s economic direction. It does not establish that all employed voters oppose Burnham or that Labour has permanently lost their support.

The real issue is whether the party can convince working households that its decisions recognise the pressures they face. That requires more than rhetoric: it requires credible policies, clear funding plans and evidence that promised improvements are being delivered.

For voters, the most useful response is to examine the proposals themselves. What would change? Who would pay? Who would benefit? What evidence supports the expected results? And are the outcomes consistent with what politicians promised?

Those questions offer a firmer basis for judging Burnham’s role and Labour’s record than the claim that an entire section of the electorate has already turned against the party. The debate over work, taxation and living standards is real, but its political consequences must be established through evidence rather than assumed from a dramatic headline.