| Another nail in the coffin 11:40 - Sep 3 with 2540 views | DJR |
and further evidence of ineptitude on the part of individuals in the government.
There has also been some suggestion that the emergence of this story is the result of briefing by factions in the government who see Rayner as a threat to Starmer.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/sep/03/angela-rayner-admits-underpayin
"Angela Rayner admits underpaying stamp duty on £800,000 seaside flat" [Post edited 3 Sep 11:41]
|  | | |  |
| Another nail in the coffin on 21:11 - Sep 3 with 371 views | BloomBlue |
| Another nail in the coffin on 19:04 - Sep 3 by Swansea_Blue |
It’s routine wealth management stuff, so yes agreed; it’d be very surprising that this wasn’t known at the time the trust was set up. She could be innocent of tax evasion and just dopey I suppose. She doesn’t strike me as dopey though. |
Trusts are always complex, but that's no excuse. Professional legal people are paid lots of money for advice, she should sue them.
But like everyone in this country, ultimately she's response for her own tax return, including stamp duty.
Trust are designed to reduce inheritance tax, although many people don't view it as reduce, rather avoid. Rayner should be pushing for abolishing trusts. |  | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 21:18 - Sep 3 with 361 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Another nail in the coffin on 21:11 - Sep 3 by BloomBlue |
Trusts are always complex, but that's no excuse. Professional legal people are paid lots of money for advice, she should sue them.
But like everyone in this country, ultimately she's response for her own tax return, including stamp duty.
Trust are designed to reduce inheritance tax, although many people don't view it as reduce, rather avoid. Rayner should be pushing for abolishing trusts. |
All sorts of other reasons and types of trusts.
And conveyancers aren't trust and tax specialists. Thast the reality.
If you reasonably rely on properly taken advice, its really not your fault.
You will have made plenty of mistakes in your time, it will be a degree of luck which means none has ever gone on to become a big issue (assuming that is the case). |  | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 21:44 - Sep 3 with 329 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Another nail in the coffin on 12:17 - Sep 3 by giant_stow |
i get your general point about a labour mp buying a second home, but do we know why she bought this one? Doesn't her fella live down there? Or is it just an investment soon to be seen on Airbandb? |
She sold the stake in her previous one to her son' trust. So this is her only property |  | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 22:03 - Sep 3 with 299 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Another nail in the coffin on 21:44 - Sep 3 by reusersfreekicks |
She sold the stake in her previous one to her son' trust. So this is her only property |
Love it when people down vote facts. | | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 22:25 - Sep 3 with 259 views | GlasgowBlue |
I’m a big admirer of Angela Rayner. She’s a real person who went into politics for the right reasons and, ill advised “Tory Scum” comments aside, she is somebody who is prepared to work with other politicians from all sides of the political divide.
It’s right that she has referred herself to the regulator who will come to the correct decision based on all the facts that they will have to hand.
Not much more to add other than to say that UK politics needs more people like Angela Rayner, regardless of which political party they belong to. So for that reason I hope that it’s found she has done nothing wrong Intentionally. |  |
| |
| Another nail in the coffin on 22:27 - Sep 3 with 248 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Another nail in the coffin on 22:03 - Sep 3 by redrickstuhaart |
Love it when people down vote facts. |
It's not people, it's Bluebudgie.
Nuff said [Post edited 3 Sep 23:06]
| | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 07:09 - Sep 4 with 166 views | Churchman |
| Another nail in the coffin on 21:18 - Sep 3 by redrickstuhaart |
All sorts of other reasons and types of trusts.
And conveyancers aren't trust and tax specialists. Thast the reality.
If you reasonably rely on properly taken advice, its really not your fault.
You will have made plenty of mistakes in your time, it will be a degree of luck which means none has ever gone on to become a big issue (assuming that is the case). |
I think it’s irrelevant whether an action is directly Rayner’s fault or not when it comes to her affairs. She is accountable. Simple as that.
Lack of accountability and blaming others, especially those down the food chain that cannot answer back, seems to be a first port of call for politicians and this has been for decades. The last one to put his hand up that I can recall is Lord Carrington who resigned over the failure to foresee the Falklands invasion in 1982. |  | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 07:50 - Sep 4 with 120 views | textbackup |
| Another nail in the coffin on 13:44 - Sep 3 by CastroSito |
That she's not a tax expert and paid someone who, supposedly, was? |
In which case there must be evidence that she can produce to show all the communication between her and them?
FWIW I don’t care if she’s tried to pull a fast one, we’d all happily pay less tax if we thought we could get away with it |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Another nail in the coffin on 08:18 - Sep 4 with 80 views | soupytwist |
| Another nail in the coffin on 17:24 - Sep 3 by DJR |
The Guardian says the trustees of the trust are Rayner, her ex-husband and the law firm Shoosmiths.
Shoosmiths is a pretty reputable and large UK law firm, and I would imagine that it set up the trust.
That being the case, it seems difficult to imagine that a firm such as that wouldn't know the law.
Maybe she used a local firm in Hove instead for the purchase which didn't have such expertise but if she wrong about the advice being wrong I imagine the solicitors firm concerned would not take this lying down.. [Post edited 3 Sep 17:26]
|
According to Dan Neidle, respected tax law commentator, Shoosmith's has said that it was not the firm which advised Angela Rayner to pay the lower amount of stamp duty on her Hove flat.
So maybe she did use whichever solicitor the estate agent selling the flat recommended. Maybe they didn't ask about any applicable trusts and Rayner's understanding of the intricacies of the law on trusts and home ownership was sketchy.
A bit naive of Rayner if so. |  | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 08:20 - Sep 4 with 69 views | soupytwist |
| Another nail in the coffin on 07:09 - Sep 4 by Churchman |
I think it’s irrelevant whether an action is directly Rayner’s fault or not when it comes to her affairs. She is accountable. Simple as that.
Lack of accountability and blaming others, especially those down the food chain that cannot answer back, seems to be a first port of call for politicians and this has been for decades. The last one to put his hand up that I can recall is Lord Carrington who resigned over the failure to foresee the Falklands invasion in 1982. |
And, unless there's evidence that she lied or gave misleading information in some other way, accountability means paying the right amount of tax and any applicable interest to HMRC doesn't it? Which I'm pretty sure she will. | | | |
| Another nail in the coffin on 08:44 - Sep 4 with 14 views | Churchman |
| Another nail in the coffin on 08:20 - Sep 4 by soupytwist |
And, unless there's evidence that she lied or gave misleading information in some other way, accountability means paying the right amount of tax and any applicable interest to HMRC doesn't it? Which I'm pretty sure she will. |
And presumably accepting any petty fine that goes with it.
Yes, we all make mistakes. The trick is avoiding as many as one can and I’d have thought that if you were in public life you would make doubly sure you were squeaky clean.
As the moment, as co-executor, I am dealing with my late brother in law’s affairs. They are financially complex beyond belief. Of course we have employed solicitors to do the work, but I will be making sure I understand as much as I can before the IHT paperwork goes to HMRC and and also seeking advice from a tax inspector chum of mine.
Why should I do this? Because my name is going against it. I see it as my responsibility to know that as far as possible it’s been done right, not least for the large number of charities that will benefit. It’s too important to ignore/ just leave purely it to ‘the experts’, though they will of course be doing all the work for their £. It’s well beyond the scope of my tiny brain.
Back to Rayner, it’s down to her. Nobody else. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
