He had also argued that his father Pinchas, who was born in what was then part of Hungary and came to the UK in 1938, had not intended to settle here.
But, while his father left the UK after 34 years in 1972 and became a US citizen, the tribunal decided that Pinchas had “acquired a domicile of choice in England, abandoning his European domicile of origin”.
In 1967, the younger Weis went to Israel for three years to study for his rabbinic qualifications. In 1969, during a visit home, he met his wife to be, who was studying in Manchester but whose family lived in Israel. They married in Israel later that year.
After coming back to Manchester in 1970, Rabbi Weis managed his father’s property portfolio for a number of years. He also started some business ventures, selling furniture and then pens before acquiring properties of his own.
While the tribunal said HMRC did not have a precise figure for his portfolio, he was a director of more than 200 companies with assets insured for over £1 billion. For around 10 years, his son Joel has been running the business, although Rabbi Weis – now in poor health and with limited mobility – has retained an important role.
Rabbi Weis also established charities with assets of around £175 million and started a synagogue in Manchester, Kol Rinah.
He told the tribunal that he had returned from Israel to look after his father’s business affairs until they were wound up but it was while he was living in the the Jewish state as a student that he had formed the intention of “ending his days” there.
At one point he had leased a flat in Israel, although it was not considered suitable for his long-term needs.
Rabbi Weis explained that he had been kept in the UK by various contingencies, which included the need to find a successor to run Kol Rinah and, later, medical issues.
But the tribunal remained unconvinced that his residence here was meant to be temporary, concluding that he “had a thriving business he had worked hard to establish, a home and family and was leader of a growing Jewish community which he had founded,” adding: “All present a compelling picture of someone who has a settled intention to make their permanent home in England.”
While Rabbi Weiss may have had family ties to Israel and a “vague or aspirational desire” to move there at some point, the tribunal concluded that his actions were “consistent with a settled intention to remain in England”.
