Is Angela Raynor a liar or is it all anti Labour media bias?

[CormorantStrikesBack]

I’m well aware how anti Labour a lot of the main stream media seem to be so I wasn’t paying much attention previously to all the stuff about how she should have paid capital gains tax on her house, etc. she was adamant that she didn’t need to.

So it seems like she said it was her main residence so not liable for capital gains tax. But her husband and kids lived in a house a short distance away apparently for the first five years of their marriage which is unusual. A neighbour who lived next to her “husband’s” house said it was the main family home and Angela definitely lived there.

I’ll be sad if she has lied. Always thought she was on the side of the ordinary person. I guess the police/tax man might have a hard time proving anything though regardless of the neighbour’s statement. If all bills, etc were in the individual names there’s no evidence.

You don't seriously mean a £500m tax bill??
Wow. That's a lot, I hope HMRC get that back asap

https://www.cityam.com/jcbs-bamford-brothers-could-owe-as-much-as-500m-in-hmrc-probe-reports/

Love that Rayner's "crime" was revealed by....Lord Ashcroft!

I guess he is familiar with the subject 😁

Ashcroft would never have made this mistake because he would have received tax advice before marriage to mitigate tax as much as possible. I think the rules have changed, but back in 2015 he could just have made sure the property was owned by an offshore trust.

Belize is such a beautiful country. No wonder he wanted to live there.....

She did rent it out! Her brother rented it from her.

How did she get a council house in the first place?

How would someone in her position qualify for social housing?
She bought it at a discount from the council, then tried to pretend she lived in it, while all the time lived with her husband at his house and rented her house out to her brother.
She then sold it, claiming it was her main residence to avoid paying CGT on the sale proceeds.
And she thought nobody would notice? Goodness, surely in a position like that, you’d at least try to be above board!
The level of corruption linked to people in politics really seems to have no end.

@MillyMollyMandy01 "How did she get a council house in the first place?

How would someone in her position qualify for social housing?"
Could you clarify- what position was she in?

She wasn't 'in her position' before she was in politics.

At the time Angela Rayner was awarded the tenancy on her council house she was a single parent working a regular job, she will have been on the waiting list like anyone.

She was a care worker.
You need to do some reading about her background.

Her brother lived there.... with her, is there a law against that? AR also lived in the house for many years previous to the sale.

She was given the house many years earlier as a single mum.

But once again, the media turn on a woman, aided by women on MN

We ve rising boat crossings, cost of living crisis, Wragg giving away colleagues personal details to a foreign state, an NHS crisis but lets focus in on a woman, who at the time of this alleged fraud (that has zero evidence) wasn't even an MP.

I despair.

Rayner doesn't stand a chance! She's now condemned for having a council house because she was going to become an MP in the future.

@MillyMollyMandy01 is on a wind up, surely? If not, maybe read up on some facts before you post, Milly!

@IClaudine Owning two houses and selling the house where you don’t reside usually attracts CGT on the profit. Rayner has been economic with the truth about where she was living.

Where is your evidence that she wasn't residing in the house that was sold?

1 in 10 couples marry but then don't live together.

The unsubstantiated word of a neighbour is not "evidence"

@Alexandra2001 The evidence has been widely discussed hence it’s a news item. It’s better for any mp to be clear about these things. There wouldn’t be any debate if she didn’t have two houses. There’s no evidence she wasn’t living with her husband!

@TizerorFizz No, there is speculation....

a lack of evidence isn't evidence.

She married a man who had his own house, she didn't own two houses.... yet again, more mis information.

Well the answer lies in her hands. Publish the advice, let the public see what you told the people you took advice from and what was the advice
To suggest that she is not as bad as Conservative politicians is a nonsense as is the suggestion that she has only done what the rest of us do if given the chance. She is a politician she will be the deputy PM and if the cards fell her way she could be PM. She needs to be above suspicion in all aspects of her life, as do all politicians. Sadly we increasingly see our politicians to be greedy, liars or whose personal behaviour leaves them open to blackmail.
It seems increasingly likely that she has lied and as she has always demanded the resignation of MRS who get caught out she should fall on her sword which will delight Starmer

Why is it increasingly likely she lied? evidence for this statement? she, like anyone else, is innocent until proven guilty, tax evasion is a criminal act, not civil, so there is a burden of proof to be reached, not speculation.

To me, this appears to be a Daily Mail witch hunt, to try and boost the Tories chances at the next GE, remember the both the Police and HMRC have looked into this before.

You don't know that. None of us do unless we have access to her tax records.

It depends which property she had nominated as her PPR etc. at the point of sale. It also depends on what deductions she could have made.

Well the answer lies in her hands. Publish the advice, let the public see what you told the people you took advice from and what was the advice

Why should she? It is not a requirement. Did Zahawi do this? Do any of them publish their tax advice?

Willy Waggler has potentially compromised the security of MPs and political journalists. But let's concentrate on But Rayner.

Some of the public really are stupid. But most people know deflection when they see it.

Quite. It's astonishing how little fuss is being made about that in comparison

No, because you can nominate which house should be liable for CGT.

It seems possible that she didn’t do this, because her understanding of CGT is about the same as most people who don’t have complicated tax affairs (and she became liable because she married somebody who also owned a house, not because she was a property investor or had a holiday home).

She might be guilty of accidentally underpaying maybe £1-3K in tax because she failed to nominate Vicarage Road as the main residence, but she has hardly hidden her ignorance.

I am sure Labour would have made a big deal about this if the shoe were on the other foot, but I am also sure she isn’t the only MP to have made a similar mistake, and that there are plenty of MPs avoiding similar tax charges with better planning.