Angela Rayner tax fail

[Iwishicouldflyhigh]

But it’s ok because she was just badly advised.
I’ll remember that excuse next time I fill in my tax return.

But still confused about one can have 2 main homes?

She should resign. Just the standard response from a politician, try and cheat the system and the lie when they get caught. She must have known she wasn't a first time buyer.

She isn't different, BlossomToes; I criticised them too for dragging their disabled children into things when it suited, and as I suggested, if others wished to speculate that's a matter for them

I'm not aware, though, that any of those others have claimed that folk making similar arrangements are killing people

What tax form is involved in buying a house?

But she avoided tax. It's not a witch hunt. She's admitted it. Why are you making excuses for her and going into contortions trying to argue when other people government members break the rules it's wrong but when she does it (again) it's a witch hunt? It's baffling.

Funny, because a week or so ago her office released a statement saying the family home was her main residence, and she would be paying second home council tax on the new flat in Hove.

A conveyancing solicitor does not provide advice on stamp duty; they simply calculate what’s due based on the price of the property and information from their client.

Either the solicitor or Rayner answered the question about whether this was a residential property or an additional residential property incorrectly. The solicitor gets their information from the client. So either Rayner gave the wrong information, or the solicitor received the correct information and entered it incorrectly on the SDLT1. I know which seems more likely to me.

I'm not aware, though, that any of those others have claimed that folk making similar arrangements are killing people

Is there any proof of her saying that? Because I don’t remember it and I’m pretty sure the outrage would have been nuclear.

It becomes a tax dodge when, as I understand she does, she retains the right to live in the house that she's put in trust; it's one of the perks of ownership that you can live in the house you own, and if you give it away so it's no longer to count as yours, you have to give up all those rights to it too. She didn't.

She didn't avoid tax. Avoiding tax is legal like putting money into your pension or donating to charity, She evaded tax.

She said “Tax avoidance costs lives.”

Tax evasion is a criminal offence and could incur jail time though. I don't think that's the case here TBF?

Same. Given it’s pretty much what they do.

Shoosmiths have rightly put out a statement on this distancing from Rayner’s transaction.

She’ll have to evidence this ‘bad advice’ claim and which advisor it was.

Yup. In 2013.

And then avoided tax

2013 "tax avoidance costs lives"

2017 "the public are furious with those who get.away with tax avoidance"

Who said these two things? Can we try and guess?

I'm always askance at responses like this when a brief google will present the evidence in seconds.
She tweeted 'Tax avoidance costs lives.' at 8.40am on the 11th of February 2013.

I've googled but can't see a quote from her that says that - but the current news is obviously bringing back a lot of hits so it could just be buried somewhere deep in the archives.

Did she say tax avoidance or tax evasion? If she said tax evasion she is right - it has a huge impact on the public finances which is why it is illegal.

If she said tax avoidance, then she is incorrect if she was blaming individuals who avoid tax. While tax avoidance does impact public finances it is perfectly legal and people who practice it might give you the ick but can't be blamed. Tax avoidance is the fault of the government for creating or failing to close the loopholes which allow tax avoidance to take place.

Nadhim Zahawi was completly different - it involved loans and shares in a multi-million pu d company and he was investigated by HMRC and found to be at fault owing almost five million and was also fined - he said it was a careless mistake on his part and I don't recall him saying that he had followed proffessional advice.

However he was sacked for being found to have broken the ministerial code because he did not declare the investigation when being offered and accepting the role of chancellor.

If Raynor is found to have breached the code following her self referral to the standards committee then of course she should be subject to whatever sanction they suggest.

As for Jeremy Hunt - again, I can't recall exactly what she said or when. If she asked for it to be looked into and accepted the conclusion he acted legally (which he did), then fine - there is nothing wrong with raising 'potential' tax avoidance. If she continued to call for him to resign after he was found to have acted legally - then yes, she was wrong.

I’m not surprised Shoosmiths want to distance themselves. They are the Trusts advisers, not Rayners. She hasn’t named them - it’s only people (here and in the press) inferring that from their involvement in the Trust. They don’t even do residential conveyancing under the Shoosmiths name AFAIK.

I reckon she took no personal advice on the property transaction other than engaging a conveyancing firm to handle the transaction. She won’t have even mentioned the property she owns in trust to them. Whether deliberately or because she didn’t understand, who knows. It’ll certainly be vigorously spun as a misunderstanding.

I did google. I got pages and pages about the current news.

Already owning another property is the issue, not being a first-time buyer. Having sold her share in the first property, she may well have been being honest when she told the conveyancing solicitor that she didn't own any property.

Yes I’m pleased they’ve issued a statement. I doubt anyone is responsible bar Rayner.

2013 tax avoidance costs lives.

OK I can see we require different levels of standards in our politicians. I just hope for politicians that are honourable, and can be trusted to do the right thing and are seen to the right thing. And if they break the rules that they make, they resign. Labour obviously don't believe in this creed which was clear right from last July.

BTW just so you know for your own tax return. Following "professional advice" doesn't absolve you in the eyes of HMRC. You can sue your provider of advice for negligence but you are ultimately responsible.

I don't know its code number but it's completed by the conveyancing solicitor so HMRC can track stamp duty owing.

Typo

Try Nick Ferrari on LBC if you really can't find it yourself. Everyone else seems to be able to.

Agree it will be spun as a misunderstanding. At present she is blaming the legal advice she was given but quite honestly I suspect she didnt give the whole situation to whomever was doing the legal work on her property and she will CLAIM it was a genuine error.

And yes she did say tax avoidance costs lives.

Funny how the Labour supporters claim they cannot find anything on this!

I’m not a Labour devotee. I had a letter from HMRC saying I owe them tax. Have I done something wrong?

Or, did I pay an amount of tax, understanding the people who are in charge of calculating that had done the right thing, and now the HMRC have all the information they have done a different calculation decide differently and now I have to pay a tax bill?

Whether she has done something “wrong’ in terms of tax laws is determined by whether she is prosecuted for it.