Is Labour Trying to Steal Reform’s £72 Million? The Truth
Reform UK has received £72 million in donations from two crypto billionaires, Ben Delo and Christopher Harborne.
Since then, Reform has claimed that Labour is trying to change the law retrospectively to force the party to return the money. There have been accusations of a “coup” and an attack on the rule of law.
But is that what has actually happened?
For clarity, I am not passing judgement on the donations themselves. Both were legal when accepted and there is no suggestion here that Reform or either donor knowingly broke the law.
This is simply about the claim that Labour changed its policy after Reform received the money.
What is Labour proposing?
Under the current law, someone can donate to a political party if they are registered on a UK electoral register. That can include a British citizen living overseas.
The Government is proposing a £100,000 annual limit on donations from overseas electors.
It also wants someone returning to Britain to remain subject to that limit until they have been resident here for one complete calendar year.
The controversial bit is that the rules would be applied retrospectively.
Donations from overseas electors made on or after 25 March 2026 could be covered, even though the legislation had not yet become law. Any donation exceeding the limit could then have to be returned.
The Government says this is needed to stop people rushing through large donations before the legislation takes effect. Whether applying a law retrospectively is right is a separate debate. The important point is that this was announced before Reform received the £72 million. (www.gov.uk)
What is the timeline?
On 17 July 2025, the Government published its strategy for modern and secure elections. This proposed stronger checks on donors, restrictions on shell companies and action to prevent foreign money entering British politics. (www.gov.uk)
On 16 December 2025, it commissioned the independent Rycroft Review into foreign financial interference. (www.gov.uk)
The Representation of the People Bill was then introduced on 12 February 2026.
On 25 March, the Government announced the proposed £100,000 overseas-donation limit. It also told political parties that the new limit would apply to donations made from that date.
On 6 July, the Government published its full response to the Rycroft Review. It confirmed both the £100,000 limit and the proposed retrospective arrangements for overseas electors and some people returning to Britain. (www.gov.uk)
Ben Delo’s £36 million donation was announced on 11 September 2026.
Christopher Harborne matched it the following day, bringing the total to £72 million. (www.reuters.com)
Both donations therefore came nearly six months after the Government announced that the proposed rules would be backdated to 25 March.
Does the law apply to these donors?
Delo reportedly recently returned to Britain from Hong Kong. Harborne has lived in Thailand for many years but is reportedly now registered to vote at an address in Hampshire.
Their British citizenship is not in question. The issue is their residency, when they returned to Britain and whether either meets the legislation’s definition of an overseas contributor or recent returner.
Reform believes the donations will not be caught by the new rules. It may well be right.
So, what is the truth?
There is a perfectly legitimate debate to be had about large political donations. There is also a legitimate debate about whether laws should ever be applied retrospectively.
But Labour did not announce this policy after seeing Reform receive £72 million.
The proposed retrospective date was announced in March and communicated to political parties. Reform accepted the donations in September, knowing that donations made after 25 March could potentially be affected.
Reform can argue that the law is wrong. It can argue that the law does not apply to its donors. But it cannot reasonably claim that the proposal was invented in response to these donations.
Comments