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?

I meant in terms of OP’s “I’ll remember that excuse” comment. A genuine mistake is considered a reasonable justification by HMRC, if you can show you took reasonable care (like getting advice from someone qualified) to do it right first time.

Rotten through and through . Wasn’t the ‘ bad advice ‘ the excuse she used the last time her property dealings came into question . The absolute hypocrite, she needs to go .

‘Other people’ aren’t deputy pm with access to the top tax experts in Britain.

especially with a complicated situation such as trusts for child etc, she really, really needed to make sure she got the right advice.

ultimately it’s her responsibility to pay the right tax.

If ordinary people make a mistake on their tax return HMRC come down on them like a ton of bricks. You would have thought that a government minister would have access to top class tax advice and would be anxious to make sure everything was water tight on such a complicated arrangement

Rayner has form for fiddling this first home/second home business - and to be fair to her she is by far from the only MP to do so.

The rules should be much clearer. They are supposed to make sure that someone who becomes an MP doesn't lose out if they are elected to a constituency that they don't live in. They are not intended to help them fiddle their expenses.

She’s actually deputy Prime Minister.
Reeves is Chancellor of Exchequer

I genuinely do not see how anyone could look at Angela Rayner and her record & the role she currently plays in a lying, exploitative, unprincipled Government, and think she is interested in anything, anything at all, other than self promotion and profit profit profit and more profit for Angela.

Maybe she once cared about something else, maybe she was morally corrupted by her associates - who knows?

Of course, in this she is no different from virtually all of the self-interested predators masquerading as British politicians (a few honourable exceptions) - and certainly no different from anyone else disgracing themselves by serving in the front bench of the revolting sewer that is Starmer’s Labour.

Exactly.

She seems to have acted entirely properly.

This is obviously complex. Cheap shots given the involvement of a disabled child are contemptible. Angela Rayner will have all the relevant advice, details of the injunction, and expert counsel's new advice which will corroborate her statement.

Meanwhile unpleasant ravens have shot her son's privacy to pieces.

Of course her entire story is an absolute lie. Any legal advice she sought and received would be double and triple checked, because of her high government profile. Her legal team wouldn’t just wing it with advice as they’d make sure all the i’s were dotted and the t’s crossed. She’s lying through her arse, and no doubt her morals will allow her to throw anyone else under the bus while doing so. She looked sheepish even when trying to talk her way out of it this morning. She knows she’s unlikely to come out of this one without consequences.

Angela admits that she made a mistake, but she was doing her best for her children, so that's OK then. Quite sweet really!

Arranging matters in the best interests of her disabled child.

No it wouldn't be double checked.

I’m livid about this. Ignorance especially someone in such an important job, is no excuse.

What’s the point of setting up a trust for housing purposes? and how could this trust buy Angela’s half of her house?

Probably any houses in trusts for children are seen as hidden ‘stately homes’, so they would never be exempt from stamp duty.
And most likely there is nothing so sensible in place as an exemption for houses in trusts for children with special needs.

I am not a labour fan but I admire AR for what she has achieved in her life; and do not want to see her hounded down over this. The stamp duty laws are probably very complicated too.

That's what lawyers are for. Her initial lawyer got it wrong. It's that lawyer's ignorance which is unacceptable (or not passing it on to a barrister in this situation - equally culpable).

A tax dodge. Rayner feels immune, she’s not.

She's a disgrace and a mega hypocrite. Been going on for years about folk screwing the system for their own benefit. Now she's done the same. Can't
stand her. I hope she goes.

Is using a Tax specialist (avoidance!) firm really in the spirit of being a socialist MP though? The rest of us plebs just grimace and pay the bill because we can’t afford the huge fees this type of company charge…

She should be sacked and banned from public office for life. Anything short of that just makes Labour even more atrocious than they already are.

It seems unlikely. Much more likely bad advice.

She followed her lawyer's advice.

Still responsible. The poor excuses won’t help much.

A lot of tax dodging systems are complicated. Why would this one be an exception.

It is unfortunate for her that she has been an attack dog on taxes, and has refused to give Tories the benefit of the doubt on tax matters. Very embarrassing to now have come a cropper like this and have her office and the PM having to spend time and political capital on this issue of her own making.

Keir Starmer said only yesterday ’phase two of my government starts today’. So far, partly thanks to Rayner, it’s not going very well. She is in danger of overshadowing the PM and his message and may therefore need to go on that basis alone.

I feel she’s been badly advised. They should have gripped this straight away, she should have fallen on her sword on the basis of a mistake having been made, give the full story (which most people would have begrudgingly accepted, even non-Labour voters, as it does appear a non-straightforward situation where a trust was involved for a disabled child), leaving the door open for her to be back in cabinet in a few months once it had blown over.

She should be sacked.