Angela Rayner's tax affairs

These days Right means what? Tory or Blue Labour or even Reform?

Seems to be a little confusion in the matter.

Ummmm you re on the 'right and you're quick enough to dive in... against Rayner.....

..... i note you don't have anything to say about Farage and his financial shenanigans.

I suspect Dan Neidle doesn't have any time for Rayner, he asks for documentation but provides none of his own for his allegations.

You keep saying 'people on the right' but Dan Neidle is a Labour Party member and recently a member of its senior disciplinary body, the NCC (2022 - 2025). Neidle has also worked as an election agent for two prominent Labour women;

His pitch for the role in 2022 -

“I’ve been a member of the Labour Party for 35 years and have been a ward secretary, ward chair and CLP Secretary. More recently, I’ve been the agent for two MPs [Stella Creasy and Emily Thornberry] and dozens of local councillors, and helped turn seats that were once marginal into Labour strongholds. I’ve practised law for 22 years and have advised candidates, MPs and campaign groups on electoral law, successfully fighting off attempts by other parties to use the legal system against us. I know the Labour Party rulebook.”

Sunak provided a summary when he was PM

Is that what you want Rayner to do?

Or is that what Neidle suggests?

@Smeuse - yes, obviously Dan Neidle is not the HMRC.
Neither is Martin Lewis.
Yet some people like to see and understand what they have to say on the matter.
Myself included, nothing wrong with it. It is interesting pertinent stuff. Not least the interpretation of the case law.

I trust HMRC and the closure of the case. However, the fact that Dan Neidle says he has not seen actual evidence does leave a niggling feeling.

Did Sunak disclose all his relevant tax affairs voluntarily in the end or not? I cannot remember.

@Araminta1003 what could convince you to accept HMRC's decision?

@pointythings - I am not smearing AR at all.

There is literally nothing wrong in the belief that Angela Rayner has had a tough life and should draw on her own experience of where the system has screwed her personally, to make things better for others, in a tangible way?
For example, improve housing, maternity services etc, perhaps this tax point and the treatment of disabled children.

What exactly is wrong with that?

As far as I can tell. Dan Neidle highlights specific areas of tax and the system which are creating anomalies, for all, including politicians.
If we are all getting screwed by the system, then surely politicians should try and improve the system? And have a good story to tell where it is personal experience they can draw on?

How exactly is that smearing?

Dan Neidle is a person with a website he wants people to visit

He is not the HMRC who have closed the case.

“Rayner has been cleared by HMRC, anyone unable to understand this is either very stupid, or working to an agenda.”

Err? Dan Neidle was head of tax at Clifford Chance - one of the largest and most profitable international law firms in the world.

I highly doubt he is “thick”.

So what is his agenda please?

I don't have an agenda. I'm just tired of the constant smearing of AR and Labour women in general. Being cleared by HMRC would be good enough for anyone else - but not for AR. This should be done now, but the endless smears continue, on Mumsnet and elsewhere. It's exhausting. It's pathetic. It's been going on since the GE. It's as if some people can't handle having anyone other than the Tories in power.

i can’t stand the hypocritical woman

but I do believe it wasn’t deliberate tax avoidance

but common sense in her position she should of checked and double checked
I think her avoidance was in trying to do it on the cheap taking basic advice when it’s very complex and it back fired

Perhaps if we didn't have people like Farage, Nice, the Sunaks doing everything they can to avoid paying their fair share, tax wouldn't be so complicated and mistakes would be harder to make.

If a lay person has to pay for specialist advice on common events, then the system is broken and flawed.

Rayner has been cleared by HMRC, anyone unable to understand this is either very stupid, or working to an agenda.

I want the focus on reform leaders who have broken the rules and tried to screw the country over deliberately.

@pointythings - not sure why you keep trying to misrepresent my perfectly reasonable posts? What is your agenda here? Note my very specific allusion to hornet’s nest.

Dan Neidle

"we can't assess whether HMRC acted correctly".

He can also not assess whether HMRC acted incorrectly

Angela Rayner has been cleared and HMRC regards the matter as closed.

The SDLT legislation is absolutely awful. I hate dealing with it and to be honest so do a lot of tax advisors.

Whenever I get an SDLT question my heart sinks.

I suspect if AR was to campaign to try and change it she'd be accused of campaigning for loopholes for her mates, or some such nonsense.

So you're just moving the goalposts then. AR has been cleared of wrongdoing by HMRC, but that isn't good enough. She must now immediately change tax law in order to be acceptable. Never mind everything else that is going on in government, if she doesn't start shouting about this, it's proof that she's a wrong 'un. I can't even.

No, incorrect @pointythings - I make no allegations against HMRC.

I simply read the points of law on the Dan Neidle website.

To me the most salient point is:

“The higher-rates-for-additional-dwellings regime is a mess in numerous respects, and this is far from the only time we’ve seen it produce results which appear unfair.”

Now in a rationale world a senior politician who this has happened to would say the law is a mess in this regard and I will make it my mission to ensure it is amended in Parliament to allow for severely disabled children trusts and severely disabled adult trust.

The reality is that AR is probably too scared to touch the hornet’s nest that has been the whole saga in case it is thrown back at her in any shape or form? Or is she going to do something about it?

So you're still suggesting that HMRC didn't apply it's usual rules and regs just because the subject is AR, correct? That's quite an allegation.

It is not an “attack”. AR hired a fancy KC to argue her case with HMRC which has not been tested in court. Sometimes the law is unclear. That is the legal system as it is.

It is perfectly fair enough to point out the man on the street has not got the means to pay up £40000 whether technically actually due or not, nor to hire a fancy KC to get them off with HMRC!

Well, yes it is because Polanski has all but admitted he owes CT.

Tice moved to Dubai & has used tax avoidance measures... note not evasion.

AR on the other hand, has been cleared of ALL wrong doing, yet instead of people on the 'right and the media accepting this... the attacks on her continue unabated.

OK I just tried to link to Dan Neidle’s tax policy webpage.
Tax policy . Org . Uk

Where one can educate oneself in detail on the law surrounding the AR case. Rather than the X snapshot.

And on Zac Polanski and Richard Tice.

Go read it and then come back and say whether it is just AR or not.

I am no Labour supporter, but completely in agreement with you. I suspect it may be even broader than Labour women, it is women in public office being held to higher standards than men, regardless of politics and class.

Yep!
Even when cleared by HMRC, the attacks don't stop, in fact they increase.

Farage must be laughing all the way to the bank, the attention that should be on him, is on Labour and Rayner.

Well done Wes!

@Alexandra2001 innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to Labour women. Nor does innocent until proven innocent. They will be hounded until they stay in their lane. Meanwhile Farage's £5mil and now possibly Jenrick's £40k are just fiiiiiine.

The double standard is alive and well.