Angela Rayner's tax affairs

[Ihateboris]

I was a few days late submitting my Tax Return due to being in hospital last year and as result I was charged £100 late filing penalty.

AIBU to think that Angela Rayner should have to pay interest and penalties for underpayment of Stamp Duty. This makes me so fucking angry.

Maybe you are baffled. Dan Neidle certainly is too. Why won’t Rayner actually release the documents if it’s all so clear cut? So we can see what she actually was advised to do at the time.

btw I have read Allison Pearson and don’t intend to start now, either. You don’t need to be a rabid DM reader to find this all a bit suspect.

*haven’t!

Why should she make her personal tax affairs public? If she’s off the hook with HMRC that’s good enough for me.

Why would she have to release her documents when HMRC have closed the case?

If we're going to demand that AR disclose all her tax affairs, we must demand the same of every politician who has had their tax affairs investigated. If we don't, that's hypocrisy. Agreed?

DN is implying "favouritism" at HMRC, he needs to produce evidence for this

Perhaps not - if the perception is that HMRC has been overly lenient with Angela Rayner then that's what the general public will believe in any case. HMRC is one of those institutions that many people have had a negative experience with.

If the general public want to believe conspiracy bollocks, that says more about them than about AR.

Are you this exercised about Farage @Ihateboris ?

For months there was daily coverage on Rayner's tax affairs, perceptions were created then

As for Tice and Farage, hardly news.

“If the general public want to believe conspiracy bollocks, that says more about them than about AR.”

Except, she is a politician and needs “the public” to vote for her.

Her constituents need to vote for her and they’re probably much more interested in her being a good constituency MP.

So do you agree that every politician who has their tax affairs investigated must disclose all the documents?

Out of interest, are HMRC currently investigating any other politicians?

Rayner is no longer under investigation.

Obviously.

They investigated Jeremy Hunt, who was also cleared. So should he have been asked to show the documentation proving this? Unless we start treating all politicians under tax investigation in exactly the same way, accusations of hypocrisy and and will (rightfully) be levelled. So do you as a matter of principle support bringing in a process that will subject all politicians in thie situation to exactly the same scrutiny?

They investigated Jeremy Hunt

HMRC?

Are you sure - when was this?

Well, there were those flats.

And Nadhim Zahawi definitely had a beef with HMRC, so should he have been asked to show all of that? It has to be equitable - yes?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-hunt-avoids-100000-stamp-12415305.amp

I would expect HMRC to treat AR just like any other member of the public. If any fines are due for late payment of the SDLT, I would expect those fines have been applied and she has paid them.

What does stick in my craw slightly is the alacrity with which Rayner has been known to call for Tories to resign at the hint of any wrongdoing, but in her case it was an ‘inadvertent mistake’.

Same with Rachel Reeves and her rental property - that was an inadvertent mistake. Is it only Labour politicians who are allowed to make inadvertent mistakes without having to resign?

“So do you agree that every politician who has their tax affairs investigated must disclose all the documents?”

Is that a trick question? “all” the documents?

I would have thought that if there is simple correspondence or documentation that proves it, definitively, it would be a no brainer to disclose for any politician under investigation.

Do I believe any politician should disclose every minutiae of their affairs and bank accounts and dump the lot in the public domain in some sort of massive mass disclosure exercise - no!

I would have thought that if there is simple correspondence or documentation that proves it, definitively, it would be a no brainer to disclose for any politician under investigation.

But why should they? We are not required to prove ourselves innocent. The fact that some members of the public like to spiral into conspiracy theories is a them problem. And as has been pointed out, only Rayner's contituents have to decide about voting for her because that's our electoral system.

Meanwhile, nobody is talking about the police investigation of Robert Jenrick's £40k donation while he was running for the Tory leadership. If people on here can't see the double standard, they're wearing blinkers.

Well, there were those flats

I can't see anything to suggest that Jeremy Hunt was investigated by HMRC.

Dan Neidle
@ DanNeidle

Jeremy Hunt didn't avoid stamp duty. The rule in question isn't a "Tory loophole". It's not a loophole, and was enacted by Labour in 2003.

11:35 AM · Sep 4, 2025

I agree OP, it's an absolute pisstake. Regardless of whether or not she made a genuine mistake, the fine has clearly been waived specifically for her.

And yet if we so much as underpay by £1, the HMRC are on your arse before the ink is dry on your return.