Angela Rayner

[The Voice of Reason]

I like her.  

She’s feisty and has achieved a lot from humble beginnings. I’d say she is better than her boss in promoting the Labour movement.

But there is this issue about her not declaring the profit on the sale of her former council house which would be subject to Capital Gains Tax if it wasn’t her main residence. Her husband has/ had his own house.

I know it’s the Daily Mail that is primarily pursuing this story, so you could normally laugh that off. But it has gained currency from other media.

She says that she has had legal advice that this was all above board but won’t disclose that advice.

I fear that if she persists in this non disclosure and tries to ride the storm out,  the UK could lose one of its most representative politicians. 
 

I don’t understand why (a) she won’t produce this legal advice, if it exists or ( b) hold up her hands and say it was all a mistake ( rather than admit to tax avoidance) and offer to pay the requisite amount of tax on the transaction and take any sanction that HMRC may apply.

In the scheme of things it doesn’t involve large sums of money and the UK electorate have previously forgiven much  greater indiscretions.

It would be a shame if she were to be cast into the wilderness.

[finlo]

Not a bad rack if nothing else!

[HeliX]

28 minutes ago, finlo said:

Not a bad rack if nothing else!

Someone's daughter.

[finlo]

Boo hoo!

[P.K.]

It's an election year.

Expect the Daily Mail, the Express, the Sun and the Telegraph to do everything they possibly can to diss anything to do with opposition to the worst tory administration in living memory and possibly forever.

Frankly, when you think just how awful the tories are, dissing the opposition really is pissing in the wind...

[Primator]

4 hours ago, finlo said:

Not a bad rack if nothing else!

Boris has got a decent pair of jugs on him but it didn’t do him any favours. 

[La Colombe]

Ooh! A squirrel. 

 

 

[manxman1980]

15 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I know it’s the Daily Mail that is primarily pursuing this story, so you could normally laugh that off. But it has gained currency from other media.

Exactly, it is the Daily Mail and according to Dan Hodges (of the Daily Mail) being interviewed this morning the interest is not so much that anything illegal may have taken place but they are aiming to portray her as a hypocrite.  They are trying to say that she took advantage of a scheme that allowed the sale of Council Houses and made a financial gain as a result and that having done so she now wishes to prevent anyone else being able to do that by changing the rules around buying Council Houses. 

In that same interview he said that Angela Rayner was often the Labour Party "attack dog" and cited her calls for Rishi Sunak's tax affairs to be published as yet more evidence she is a hypocrite.

The reality is the Daily Mail and the Conservative Party know the situation is desperate and are looking for any opportunity to attack Starmer or Rayner in the hopes that it prevents a total wipe out at the next General Election.

15 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

She says that she has had legal advice that this was all above board but won’t disclose that advice.

I fear that if she persists in this non disclosure and tries to ride the storm out,  the UK could lose one of its most representative politicians. 

I don’t understand why (a) she won’t produce this legal advice, if it exists or ( b) hold up her hands and say it was all a mistake ( rather than admit to tax avoidance) and offer to pay the requisite amount of tax on the transaction and take any sanction that HMRC may apply.

(a) That legal advice may never have been committed to writing.  I know when I have bought and sold property in the past the legal advice is very rarely confirmed in writing and is often more verbal advice.  I have not taken legal advice over tax so I am not 100% certain whether that would be the case there as well.

(b) If she has believes she has complied with all the legal requirements why would/should she then hold her hands up and say it was a mistake? Whilst repaying the amount to HMRC may seem like it will put everything to bed it really won't.  The Daily Mail will simply use it to say she was "guilty".

[Albert Tatlock]

She always sounds as thick as toast to me.

[quilp]

"Am I bovvered! Do I even look like am bovvered..?"

 

[The Voice of Reason]

3 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said:

She always sounds as thick as toast to me.

That’s the sort of prejudice she has had to battle with being the owner of a northern accent.

Sounds quite homely to me.

[The Voice of Reason]

6 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

 

(a) That legal advice may never have been committed to writing.  I know when I have bought and sold property in the past the legal advice is very rarely confirmed in writing and is often more verbal advice. 

 

Well that’s a bit silly for transactions of that nature and magnitude. If you are paying out / receiving ( I imagine) hundreds of thousands of pounds I would want something in writing. 
 

I know you are talking advice here but I was always taught in contract law that the contract for a purchase/ sale of property or land is the only exception to the rule that a verbal contract is as good as a written one and that written contracts are necessary.

[John Wright]

48 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Well that’s a bit silly for transactions of that nature and magnitude. If you are paying out / receiving ( I imagine) hundreds of thousands of pounds I would want something in writing. 
 

I know you are talking advice here but I was always taught in contract law that the contract for a purchase/ sale of property or land is the only exception to the rule that a verbal contract is as good as a written one and that written contracts are necessary.

Wrong end of wrong stick.

What has compliance with the Statute of Frauds, that contracts for the sale of land ( and of guarantee, or surety, or marriage or which cannot be performed within 12 months ) must be evidenced in writing signed by the person to be bound or someone authorised by the person to be bound, got to do with filling in your tax return several months later? Note, the contract for sale of land does not have to be in writing, but evidenced in writing. That’s actually very different.

We are talking about £1500 worth of CGT here, not hundreds of thousands. I sit down with my accountant, give them the figures, they fill out my tax form, explain verbally what I owe, and I check it and sign. The transaction that’s alleged to have gone wrong is a tax return. Do you get written legal, and accountancy advice on your tax return?

[Jarndyce]

5 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said:

She always sounds as thick as toast to me.

But you’re a flat-capped Northerner called Tatlock - shome mishtake shurely…

Edited April 8 by Jarndyce

[Max Power]

I think she's got the abilities to be a better chancellor than we have had recently, she does hide her talents behind what appears to be a carefully cultivated northern labour persona perhaps? 

Unfortunately there is very little that she can do about the UK economy if Labour are elected, although she seems to be having a lot of ideas which are adopted by the conservatives. Hopefully she's got some more up her sleeve which she's holding back before the election so that they can't be inserted into the cons manifesto?