Page 40 | Angela Rayner tax fail

Iwishicouldflyhigh · 2025-09-03T11:56:44+00:00

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?

MaturingCheeseball · 05/09/2025 09:01

Isn’t she a grandma as well? Perhaps her dd is on MN complaining about AR not stepping up to do childcare 😁

I’m sure there are many dodgy property dealings going on right now. Ds’s friend’s family own about six (large) houses locally and seem to move from one to another… I must ask them for some advice…. BUT if you are the deputy prime minister you should not be a) on the dodgy side and, more importantly (!) b) NOT be weeping and wailing and saying you didn’t know something. Imagine if she had to stand in as PM - “Boo hoo, I don’t know about foreign powers…”

ThatWaryOchreQuoter · 05/09/2025 09:02

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

AR didn’t seem to have any problems with turfing disabled kids out of their independent schools, I guess those parents ‘safeguarding’ their children’s futures are fair game? Are farmers wanting to pass generational farms onto their children not ‘safeguarding’ their children? Are families renting out a flat they couldn’t sell not ‘safeguarding’ their children’s future?are middle class parents wanting their children to have access university or graduate schemes for the civil service the same as other children not ‘safeguarding’ their children? Are parents wanting to pass on inheritance to their children not ‘safeguarding’ ?

The self righteous hypocrisy is through the roof, but exactly what I expect of Labour and their supporters

Judashascomeintosomemoney · 05/09/2025 09:02

Lifeinthepit · 05/09/2025 07:24

I think this is a really serious part. If the property was overvalued (by who) then she will have defrauded the trust. A trust that contained her son's compensation not a trust that was there to be used as a money pot to ensure she had enough for a deposit.

Politicians seem to excuse themselves from responsibility for most of their dodgy actions these days (Lord Ali and his freebies buying political influence for example). Moral standards which were already low have slipped considerably under Keir Starmer's rabble of dodgy incompetents. So the fact she didn't resign or hasnt been sacked is not really a surprise. It's just irritating to have to listen to this pompous sanctimonious Prime Minister pretending he is running an honourable, successful and decent government. The last PMQs a case in point. His sneering tone was hard to listen to.

Edited

Show quote history

Indeed. I was listening to The Reunion yesterday about the last days of the John Major government. Brought down, amongst other things, by the cash for questions scandal and ‘Tory Sleaze’. But in direct contrast to these days, Major’s response was to try to tackle it by setting up the Committee on Standards in Public Life, from where we get the Nolan Principles (something I doubt Angela Rayner has read). I remember at the time the (not so great) late Alan Clark commenting that ‘At least you know where you are with the sleazy Tories’ - meaning the Labour Party will be just as bad, they just won’t admit to it. Something this government, under Starmer, is proving to be correct. I was wondering where that started and I think it was under Blair. I guess any government with such a strong working majority feels they can treat parliament and the electorate with utter contempt and walk the line of political corruption, and get away with it.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/09/2025 09:03

StressedEric · 04/09/2025 22:12

also , on a wider point, why have both AR and RR deployed tears when in political difficulties. I found AR’s interview with the very sympathetic Beth Rigby to be deeply manipulative.

Can you imagine the vitriol that they both would have deployed if senior Tory women had done similar - eg Liz Truss .
did she do think of Liz Truss’s children when denouncing her , or Nadhim Zahawi’s children when his local difficulties with HMRC were the political football of the day . What would have been her reaction if either of them had cried and said “ won’t you think about my children “

hypocrite

Presumably they both thought it might work in theirr favour, StressedEric?
When in a hole like this some feel the need to chuck everything at it in some hope of avoiding accountability, and this is just one more thing

Codgercockles · 05/09/2025 09:03

The exposé of her avoidance of 2nd home stamp duty has opened a can of worms. She and her partner previously sold 50% of their house to the son's trust fund. Now she has sold her 25%. The son would have stayed in the house before this as his trust owned half so it wasn't to ensure he was housed for life . He has not benefitted from the latest deal. She, however has gained £162,500 which is exactly what she needed for a 20/80 LTV mortgage on her new 800k Hove flat. She and her husbands are trustees of her son's trust fund which was set up with huge compensation they received by suing the NHS. This is for his lifelong care as he is disabled, and trustees are bound to act in his interests. How is taking money from his trust to buy 20% of a home in Hove 250 miles away, in his interests? What 3rd trustee signed off on this? According to locals, the house in Ashton was also overvalued, as this was needed to ensure the 25% of her share amounted to the 20% needed as deposit for Hove. Had she waited until he was 18 ( this next year) the original stamp duty payment would have been legal, however, at 18 he would have control of his trust and may have refused to release the funds, also by clearing out his trust fund by the time he is an adult he can also claim all the state benefits to which he is entitled so not such a daft move.The NHS compo pay out was for his lifelong care, not to pay off his parents' mortgage nor buy a love nest in Brighton. She has insisted she took legal advice regarding the stamp duty; her conveyancing company have furiously denied this. Who gave her the legal advice regarding raiding his trust fund and how much did the trust pay for the first 50% of the Ashton home and was it at fair market value then? Who put the court order in place to ensure confidentiality regarding her family's financial affairs and why? Couple this with her not paying CGT on her previous council home which she bought through the RTB scheme, insisting itwas her primary home ( when all evidence shows her brother lived there and she elsewhere with her then partner and kids) and it's clear she's a Con artist. This will really test the PM's mettle. The OPG should also look into whether there has been abuse of the trust by the trustees who have not had the beneficiary's best interests at heart, and honoured their fiduciary duties. She should resign immediately.

usernamealreadytaken · 05/09/2025 09:05

C8H10N4O2 · 05/09/2025 08:58

Did Rayner say “bad advice”? I’ve only seen that in the follow on stories. “Wrong advice” (which is what I’ve seen in official sources) can be given in good faith.

Multiple posters have described the complexity around stamp duty where there is a child trust involved and property in trust for the child. As I said, my iLs nearly fell foul of this and as a friend who is a (Tory voting) KC in trust law pointed out to me - the Hove property was for residential use and the only property she owns. She had no financial stake in the Manchester property so that answer to the standard “do you have any other properties” would correctly be “no”. Unlike ChatGPT upthread his view was that its very easy to get this wrong between two sets of solicitors with two different specialisms involved in two different transactions. He would use a stamp duty tax expert on this, I’ve no idea if the conveyancers did. Obviously though, he should retire and let Chat GPT deal with the cases

There is also the question as to why anyone should pay second property stamp duty on their only mortgaged/owned property unless its for commercial use. Take the politics out of it and you have a parent of a disabled child spending a chunk of their time with the disabled child in the child’s trust owned adapted property and for the rest owns their own home.

The stamp duty issue around a child trust is complex, the rules around MPs’ residences are complex (and long overdue for sorting out). I can see how honest mistakes caused this in what is an extremely niche situation. She could well be the only tax payer in the country in her precise situation.

Show quote history

Perhaps she should sue Shoosmiths, who set up the trust, for not making it clear that, as a parent/trustee for a minor, she was still the legal owner of the property? You'd expect your trust advisors to give you all the relevant details when you established and changed the trust. I’d actually dind it quite incredible if they didn’t - probably via documentation which she perhaps didnt read or understand, but possibly signed documents confirming that she did?

EasternStandard · 05/09/2025 09:07

C8H10N4O2 · 05/09/2025 08:58

Did Rayner say “bad advice”? I’ve only seen that in the follow on stories. “Wrong advice” (which is what I’ve seen in official sources) can be given in good faith.

Multiple posters have described the complexity around stamp duty where there is a child trust involved and property in trust for the child. As I said, my iLs nearly fell foul of this and as a friend who is a (Tory voting) KC in trust law pointed out to me - the Hove property was for residential use and the only property she owns. She had no financial stake in the Manchester property so that answer to the standard “do you have any other properties” would correctly be “no”. Unlike ChatGPT upthread his view was that its very easy to get this wrong between two sets of solicitors with two different specialisms involved in two different transactions. He would use a stamp duty tax expert on this, I’ve no idea if the conveyancers did. Obviously though, he should retire and let Chat GPT deal with the cases

There is also the question as to why anyone should pay second property stamp duty on their only mortgaged/owned property unless its for commercial use. Take the politics out of it and you have a parent of a disabled child spending a chunk of their time with the disabled child in the child’s trust owned adapted property and for the rest owns their own home.

The stamp duty issue around a child trust is complex, the rules around MPs’ residences are complex (and long overdue for sorting out). I can see how honest mistakes caused this in what is an extremely niche situation. She could well be the only tax payer in the country in her precise situation.

Show quote history

I don’t see the difference is worth remarking on. But yes bad advice has been used. Here’s Streeting repeating her lie

“It turns out she was badly advised, but understandably she’s followed the advice in good faith.”

All the Labour MPs who’ve repeated that lie are culpable too. Two solicitors have put out statements due to that lie too.

https://www.channel4.com/news/angela-rayner-made-an-honest-mistake-on-stamp-duty-wes-streeting

Angela Rayner ‘made an honest mistake’ on stamp duty – Wes Streeting

Earlier we spoke to the Health Secretary Wes Streeting. We asked him if "bad advice" is a good enough excuse from the Deputy Prime Minister.

https://www.channel4.com/news/angela-rayner-made-an-honest-mistake-on-stamp-duty-wes-streeting

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/09/2025 09:08

There’s nothing necessarily wrong with tax avoidance (as distinct from evasion)

Quite right, @GoodPudding - although Rayner's been loud about it being wrong when others do it - but then if she'd simply avoided tax she wouldn't owe £40k and the fact she does suggests tax evasion instead

ladybirdsanchez · 05/09/2025 09:09

Well said @Codgercockles! No one else seems to be questioning why AR was buying a home with funds from her DS's NHS payout that is 300 miles from where he lives, which is clearly a chicken run attempt on her part and which is, oh so conveniently, near where her latest boyfriend lives.

How does any of this benefit her disabled DS, whose money it is?????? It would appear that she has used the money paid by the NHS for her DS's lifetime care, to enrich herself and via some creative accounting buy herself a third home by the seaside. Is that legal? If it is, it's morally repugnant.

Fraudornot · 05/09/2025 09:10

@CodgercocklesI was just thinking about the first 50% of the house and if they got a lump sum from the compensation for that. It all sounds very immoral to me.

C8H10N4O2 · 05/09/2025 09:11

nomas · 05/09/2025 08:57

How did she seriously think that didn’t apply to her?

Show quote history

She doesn’t own more than one residential property. I think the child in question is 18? However that is a rule to stop people putting their own homes into trust for their perfectly well children to avoid tax.

This is a trust set up to care for a disabled child in an adapted property and administer a compensation award - there are some differences in how the property is treated for tax purposes. Again - it would need a stamp duty taxation expert, I have no idea if the conveyancers recommended using one.

Thyra123 · 05/09/2025 09:12

Codgercockles · 05/09/2025 09:01

The exposé of her avoidance of 2nd home stamp duty has opened a can of worms. She and her partner previously sold 50% of their house to the son's trust fund. Now she has sold her 25%. The son would have stayed in the house before this as his trust owned half so it wasn't to ensure he was housed for life . He has not benefitted from the latest deal. She, however has gained £162,500 which is exactly what she needed for a 20/80 LTV mortgage on her new 800k Hove flat. She and her husbands are trustees of her son's trust fund which was set up with huge compensation they received by suing the NHS. This is for his lifelong care as he is disabled, and trustees are bound to act in his interests. How is taking money from his trust to buy 20% of a home in Hove 250 miles away, in his interests? What 3rd trustee signed off on this? According to locals, the house in Ashton was also overvalued, as this was needed to ensure the 25% of her share amounted to the 20% needed as deposit for Hove. Had she waited until he was 18 ( this next year) the original stamp duty payment would have been legal, however, at 18 he would have control of his trust and may have refused to release the funds, also by clearing out his trust fund by the time he is an adult he can also claim all the state benefits to which he is entitled so not such a daft move.The NHS compo pay out was for his lifelong care, not to pay off his parents' mortgage nor buy a love nest in Brighton. She has insisted she took legal advice regarding the stamp duty; her conveyancing company have furiously denied this. Who gave her the legal advice regarding raiding his trust fund and how much did the trust pay for the first 50% of the Ashton home and was it at fair market value then? Who put the court order in place to ensure confidentiality regarding her family's financial affairs and why? Couple this with her not paying CGT on her previous council home which she bought through the RTB scheme, insisting itwas her primary home it was her primary home ( when all evidence shows her brother lived there and she elsewhere with her then partner and kids) and it's clear she's a Con artist. This will really test the PM's mettle. The OPG should also look into whether there has been abuse of the trust by the trustees who have not had the beneficiary's best interests at heart, and honoured their fiduciary duties. She should resign immediately.

If she hasn’t got so greedy and bought the Hove flat, she could’ve gotten away with all the rest.

Penfoldfive · 05/09/2025 09:13

usernamealreadytaken · 05/09/2025 09:05

Perhaps she should sue Shoosmiths, who set up the trust, for not making it clear that, as a parent/trustee for a minor, she was still the legal owner of the property? You'd expect your trust advisors to give you all the relevant details when you established and changed the trust. I’d actually dind it quite incredible if they didn’t - probably via documentation which she perhaps didnt read or understand, but possibly signed documents confirming that she did?

Show quote history

She wasnt the legal owner - its a specific stamp duty rule - you're deemed an owner for stamp duty if your child owns property through a trust.

The lawyers weren't advising on stamp duty for a future purchase.

Lawyers will only advise based on your instructions - they won't give random advice based on possible scenarios in the future.

Judashascomeintosomemoney · 05/09/2025 09:14

BunnyMcDougall · 05/09/2025 08:38

I guess running 3 homes is much more doable if you’ve had a payout from when you sued the NHS. Can someone remind me exactly where those payout funds came from?

They don’t come from the NHS budget, if that’s what you’re implying.

Searching4Alpha · 05/09/2025 09:14

usernamealreadytaken · 05/09/2025 09:05

Perhaps she should sue Shoosmiths, who set up the trust, for not making it clear that, as a parent/trustee for a minor, she was still the legal owner of the property? You'd expect your trust advisors to give you all the relevant details when you established and changed the trust. I’d actually dind it quite incredible if they didn’t - probably via documentation which she perhaps didnt read or understand, but possibly signed documents confirming that she did?

Show quote history

If she were contemplating suing Shoosmiths, they would undoubtedly ask her to put up costs in advance - premised on her losing.

I doubt she would be able to fund any action against them.

EasternStandard · 05/09/2025 09:14

usernamealreadytaken · 05/09/2025 09:05

Perhaps she should sue Shoosmiths, who set up the trust, for not making it clear that, as a parent/trustee for a minor, she was still the legal owner of the property? You'd expect your trust advisors to give you all the relevant details when you established and changed the trust. I’d actually dind it quite incredible if they didn’t - probably via documentation which she perhaps didnt read or understand, but possibly signed documents confirming that she did?

Show quote history

There’s no way Shoosmiths are culpable, even Rayner won’t go there.

Searching4Alpha · 05/09/2025 09:15

Thyra123 · 05/09/2025 09:12

If she hasn’t got so greedy and bought the Hove flat, she could’ve gotten away with all the rest.

Show quote history

She was rumbled, wasn’t she? She didn’t own up to it.

One has to ask what other skeletons are buried…

BunnyMcDougall · 05/09/2025 09:15

Judashascomeintosomemoney · 05/09/2025 09:14

They don’t come from the NHS budget, if that’s what you’re implying.

Show quote history

I was implying that it’s taxpayer money.

C8H10N4O2 · 05/09/2025 09:16

EasternStandard · 05/09/2025 09:07

I don’t see the difference is worth remarking on. But yes bad advice has been used. Here’s Streeting repeating her lie

“It turns out she was badly advised, but understandably she’s followed the advice in good faith.”

All the Labour MPs who’ve repeated that lie are culpable too. Two solicitors have put out statements due to that lie too.

https://www.channel4.com/news/angela-rayner-made-an-honest-mistake-on-stamp-duty-wes-streeting

Show quote history

That is Streeting saying she was badly advised, not Rayner. The difference is significant as “bad advice” can be negligence issue, wrong advice can be given in good faith.

Legoninjago1 · 05/09/2025 09:17

Ffs ignorance is no defence and in her position, she needs to get it right. It’s actually quite a black and white one for any tax advisor and she’s fudged it deliberately. She’s either dishonest or incompetent and I don’t think there’s anywhere for her to go now.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/09/2025 09:17

Is there any evidence to support the claim she took advice? I know she has said she did, but the two firms linked to her have put out clear statements that they did not advise her. She references having raised it with two ‘trust specialists’ , but that’s unsubstantiated as yet?

I expect that's something Sir Laurie Magnus will have asked her about, @Tryingtokeepgoing, but then he'll be paid by the government and the head of it clearly doesn't want to lose Rayner, so ...

nomas · 05/09/2025 09:18

C8H10N4O2 · 05/09/2025 08:58

Did Rayner say “bad advice”? I’ve only seen that in the follow on stories. “Wrong advice” (which is what I’ve seen in official sources) can be given in good faith.

Multiple posters have described the complexity around stamp duty where there is a child trust involved and property in trust for the child. As I said, my iLs nearly fell foul of this and as a friend who is a (Tory voting) KC in trust law pointed out to me - the Hove property was for residential use and the only property she owns. She had no financial stake in the Manchester property so that answer to the standard “do you have any other properties” would correctly be “no”. Unlike ChatGPT upthread his view was that its very easy to get this wrong between two sets of solicitors with two different specialisms involved in two different transactions. He would use a stamp duty tax expert on this, I’ve no idea if the conveyancers did. Obviously though, he should retire and let Chat GPT deal with the cases

There is also the question as to why anyone should pay second property stamp duty on their only mortgaged/owned property unless its for commercial use. Take the politics out of it and you have a parent of a disabled child spending a chunk of their time with the disabled child in the child’s trust owned adapted property and for the rest owns their own home.

The stamp duty issue around a child trust is complex, the rules around MPs’ residences are complex (and long overdue for sorting out). I can see how honest mistakes caused this in what is an extremely niche situation. She could well be the only tax payer in the country in her precise situation.

Show quote history

It’s really not that complex. Her child is under 18 and Rayner can still live in that house if she wanted to so it counts as her main home for tax reasons.

If a layperson gets that, then a minister with all those government bodies at her disposal should have known that. One call to the HMRC would have clarified it for her.

Your Tory voting friend should know this.

BIossomtoes · 05/09/2025 09:18

BunnyMcDougall · 05/09/2025 09:15

I was implying that it’s taxpayer money.

Show quote history

You were implying wrong. NHS trusts all have indemnity insurance specifically to avoid taxpayers’ money being awarded in compensation claims.

nomas · 05/09/2025 09:19

C8H10N4O2 · 05/09/2025 09:16

That is Streeting saying she was badly advised, not Rayner. The difference is significant as “bad advice” can be negligence issue, wrong advice can be given in good faith.

Show quote history

The solicitors firm say they did not give her tax advice.

It’s not right that their company name is being dragged through the mud.

Thyra123 · 05/09/2025 09:19

C8H10N4O2 · 05/09/2025 09:11

She doesn’t own more than one residential property. I think the child in question is 18? However that is a rule to stop people putting their own homes into trust for their perfectly well children to avoid tax.

This is a trust set up to care for a disabled child in an adapted property and administer a compensation award - there are some differences in how the property is treated for tax purposes. Again - it would need a stamp duty taxation expert, I have no idea if the conveyancers recommended using one.

Show quote history

The child in question has only just turned 17