Labour isn't working - Thread 8

[TheNuthatch]

A chat thread for those who don't like this Labour government.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/chat/5404009-labour-isnt-working-thread-7?utmcampaign=thread&utmmedium=share

I won’t deny that I’d like to see Farage taken to the cleaners. I don’t like him or his party.

But he does have the trump card - as do all tax avoiders who aren’t Labour - that he’s never attacked anyone for being a fat cat or tax dodger.

The article says the BBC are investigating. Is what happened illegal?

Don’t think there’s a suggestion of anything illegal, but the hypocrisy and lying (if proved that he did give her the money) could be hard to defend.

Theyre also pointing the finger at the fact he is seeking specialist advice whilst claiming it’s nothing to do with him at the very least looks shifty.

There v is a difference between tax avoidance (legal) and tax evasion (illegal).
Also the hypocrisy of AR (expecting everyone else to pay tax but not her) and her vitriol over rich people which NF has not displayed.
If his partner bought the house -fine is her house! Not his.

God knows, it's not like I'm a stamp duty specialist but if it's a house, in her name then I'm not sure why it's relevant who put up the money or why that would be hard to defend?

The point is the Rayner didn't purchase her home in line with stamp duty rules, that she didn't seek tax advice as she was advised and newer suggestions that she used her position of authority over her son's trust to sell him an over-priced house to her own advantage.

Agree with the legal v illegal aspect, it does feel like the BBC want their time in the sun post Rayner.

The two events aren’t the same though

Yes, 'Look, look, here's a person who has behaved legally but we don't like him, so let's draw analogies with a person who behaved illegally and investigate him" isn't the Berntein and Woodgate boss move the BBC thinks it is.

I mean, if he has operated illegally, knock your socks off, I'll read all about it but this is a bit cart before the horse.

I think the point around Farage is the following timeline:

He claimed that he was buying a house in his constituency some time ago - told a reporter that it was in the process of going through.

When the purchase was confirmed people looked into it and said "ah ha, the regular rate of stamp duty has been paid! He's fiddling his taxes!"

Farage responds saying the house was in fact bought by his partner with money from her family and therefore nothing to do with him.

BBC investigates and finds out her family aren't "wealthy" as Farage claimed and unlikely to have £850k lying around in cash to gift to her.

So the questions are:

Did he give her the money to buy the property?
If so why did he lie about it?
Did he give her the money in order to dodge the stamp duty payment?
If the sale is nothing to do with him why has he instructed tax specialists to look into things?

You summarise it well.

I have no idea what the tax or other legal implications would be if a husband gives his wife money to buy a property in her name and so (as I understand the allegation) avoid SDLT on that purchase, presumably because she didn’t have an interest in another property and so isn’t a second home owner.

On its face it doesn’t seem a problem: he’s effectively bought his wife a house. But I’m sure it must be more complex than that from a tax liability point of view.

I can’t understand why he said that the money was his wife’s (which it may well have been, of course) if that didn’t matter.

So, they're investigating whether her parents or Farage paid for the house but if it's on the land registry as her house, then it's her house. And the tax implications build around her own circumstances - not the person giving the money.

So If I gave my kid enough money to buy a house in their name then it wouldn't be my second home for stamp duty purposes, I don't think, not even if I moved in?

Idk, maybe more details will follow?

Smacks of BBC bias - let them investigate.

Of greater public interest is Mandy’s vetting and the contents of his emails to Epstein

What did Starmer know and when?

No - if your parents or anyone else gave you money, you’d be subject to potential inheritance issues if they die within 7 years or whatever the rules are but it isn’t their house wrt tax or anything else.

I already thought the relationship with Epstein and Mandelson was a known-known. The question of who was the unnamed high ranking British politician on Epstein Island was practically answered in the same breath. Whatever additional information has been revealed it must be worse still.

I mean, the fallout for Andrew must have given them enough of an insight that any whiff of Epstein was going to be disastrous, and they did it anyway. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Well, we should be fine, they'll be lucky to get a tent by the time we've got them through uni.

I too am unconcerned about their future IHT implications 😂

Yes you’ve got to wonder about this vetting - ok Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein was well known, what was asked?

he got into sacking territory when the offer of help to Epstein in jail came out - I doubt there’s anything worse, that was the line I reckon.

In a previous role, I was put through vetting by Kroll. They went through everything, and I mean, everything. I had to make full disclosures too.

This government is either disingenuous or incompetent, or both.

How many more fuck ups can Starmer bear?

This government is either disingenuous or incompetent, or both.

That’s the easiest multiple choice question ever 🤣 (c)

Surely one a week is over the limit?

Yep

Its OK Keir, everyone is allowed one dickhead mate.

Oh wait, you’ve had… I’ve actually lost count.

We really need the laughng emoji. Bravo mrs!

I'm only going by Sky news, but the security services did flag concerns before Mandy was appointed, but it appears they were ignored by no.10. This alone should raise concerns, if the political leaders of our country are ignoring their security services advice. It could end very badly.

Yes DM is reporting the same as is BBC ie No 10 were aware of relationship between Mandy and Epstein.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15087449/Mandelson-brink-Labour-MPs-join-fury-emails-UK-envoy-told-Epstein-friends-love-you-minister-saying-job-far-know.html

From the BBC:
The Epstein stuff in broad terms was definitely known and discussed in detail before his appointment," said one source.Another insider said that as part of the Cabinet Office vetting process Lord Mandelson was "specifically asked about the association with Epstein" and he was "clear about it".