In a recent LinkedIn post, Daniel Priestley argues for a renewed focus on policies that support entrepreneurs, specifically highlighting the impact of the former Entrepreneurs’ Relief in the UK. Priestley contends that such initiatives are crucial for fostering economic growth and job creation, rather than being seen as antagonistic to societal progress.
Priestley begins by clarifying his stance, stating, “I’m Not Anti-Labour. I’m Pro-Entrepreneur.” He then elaborates on Entrepreneurs’ Relief, a policy that previously taxed the first £10 million of business gains at a reduced rate of 10%. According to Priestley, this was a significant acknowledgment of the risks and sacrifices involved in building a business.
“On a decade of risk, sleepless nights, missed birthdays, personal guarantees, unpaid 70hr weeks, and founder salary cuts taken so the team could still get paid, it was an acknowledgment. A nod from the state to say ‘we see you’. We see what you’ve risked to build this.”
The Historical Context of Entrepreneurs’ Relief
Priestley points out a surprising historical detail: the policy was originally introduced by a Labour government under Gordon Brown in 2008, at the onset of the financial crisis. He suggests this demonstrated an understanding that entrepreneurs are vital to a functioning economy.
As Daniel Priestley notes, “That Labour government understood something that seems to have been forgotten: entrepreneurs aren’t the enemy of a fair society. They’re often the ones funding it. They create jobs, generate taxes, fund pensions, innovate and export.”
Critique of Policy Changes
The article then pivots to critique the gutting of this relief under Rishi Sunak in 2020, when it was rebranded as “Business Asset Disposal Relief.” Priestley views this change, and its bureaucratic name, as a negative signal to founders.
“Rishi Sunak. In 2020, as Chancellor, he slashed and rebranded it “Business Asset Disposal Relief” – a name so soul-crushingly bureaucratic it tells you everything you need to know about the mindset behind it.”
Priestley argues that the modest projected savings from this change did not justify the significant negative impact on the entrepreneurial ecosystem. He asserts that the move signaled to founders that the UK was not a welcoming environment for their ventures.
The Impact of Policy Signals
According to Daniel Priestley, this policy shift has led to a brain drain, with talented entrepreneurs relocating to international hubs like Dubai, Singapore, and Lisbon. He attributes this not to greed, but to a disrupted risk-to-reward ratio.
“I’ve watched brilliant, job-creating, tax-paying, globally competitive founders relocate to Dubai, Singapore, Lisbon, Zurich and the US. Not because they’re greedy. Because the risk to reward ratio was disrupted,” Priestley writes.
A Call for Pro-Entrepreneurial Stance
Priestley expresses a desire for the current Labour party to reconnect with the principle that supporting entrepreneurs is inherently beneficial for workers and overall economic growth. He warns that undermining the incentives for business success can degrade the entire economic ecosystem.
He concludes by urging for the reinstatement of Entrepreneurs’ Relief, framing it as a pragmatic economic decision rather than mere flattery towards founders. “Countries that welcome risk-takers get more of them. Countries that punish success export it,” Priestley states, emphasizing the choice the UK faces in fostering or losing its entrepreneurial talent.
📝 About This Content
This article is based on insights shared by Daniel Priestley on LinkedIn.
📅 Originally posted on April 18, 2026 | View original post on LinkedIn →