Blairs saved £312k in stamp duty deal.

Germanshepherdsmum

If you mean me, Kapitan, you’ve got my politics badly wrong I’m afraid.

I think the children have come out to play, Germanshepherdsmum

Kapitan

Ah. How sweet. The socialists are bending over backwards to lend support to their ex leader Tony Blair.

Which 'socialists' are these?

I was curious as to how buying a property through a company worked. Probably everyone else knows, but here it is:

If a UK or offshore company is used to purchase a property, it will still pay SDLT on the purchase price at the same rate as an individual would if he/she purchased the property direct. There is no immediate SDLT saving on purchase.

An SDLT saving may arise however when the time comes to sell the property. Rather than selling the property, it is possible to sell the shares in the company thus transferring ownership of the property. This means that the new purchaser (and any future purchaser of the shares) pays stamp duty at 0.5 percent (provided it is a UK company) or no stamp duty (if an offshore company is used) on the purchase price of the shares rather than SDLT at 4 percent or 5 percent on the purchase price of the property. On a residential property valued at £2 million, subsequent purchasers could save £90,000 from purchasing the shares in a UK company as opposed to purchasing the property direct.

(SDLT is Stamp Duty Land Tax, Stamp Duty for short..)

www.boodlehatfield.com/articles/is-it-possible-to-avoid-stamp-duty-on-land-and-property/

so do buy to lets avoid paying stamp duty too, as it is set as a business?

No Jane, this only applies if you buy a property owned by a company and instead of just buying the property you buy the shares in the company and all its assets. It has to be a clean company, no liabilities, to be worthwhile.

Oh, look. Here's a BBC article about Sir Philip & Lady Green showing how buying through a company is done

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58804504

Does that preclude him from legally buying property?

No more than it precludes someone from being a Tory donor!

Is it immoral for a Labour supporter to own a holiday home or
pay for private health care , to own two cars ?

The Blair's are the tip of the iceberg and what they did was not illegal. I would imagine that there's a lot of people having sleepless nights over Pandora. However maybe not. Maybe they are betting that people just don't care enough to bother? The Tories have accepted millions from people without looking into the details too much. Can't see much of an uproar.

The Blair’s are the tip of what iceberg?

Opinion
Pandora papers
Access to the Tory party is being bought by a new class of tycoon funders
Peter Oborne

In light of revelations in the Pandora papers, we need to be asking what are they getting in return?

Boris Johnson appointed Ben Elliot as Tory co-chair. This appointment changed the structure of the British Tory party.’

Tony Blair (little surprise to see his appearance in Pandora) helped create this model during his famous period in opposition before 1997. Eager to sideline the unions, the ambitious young Labour leader and his aide Jonathan Powell encouraged fundraising from wealthy donors.

The Tories followed suit. They may have felt they had little choice. Money was hard to come by and the membership was dying. Suddenly party donors became important figures, men and women of note.

But it is Johnson who has been the most shameless by far about this arrangement. On becoming Tory leader he appointed Ben Elliot, whose former business clients include Mohamed Amersi, who looms large in the Pandora papers) as Tory co-chair. This appointment changed the structure of the British Tory party. And it is no surprise to learn, courtesy of the Pandora papers, that Elliot jointly owned a secret offshore film financing business.

At first sight Eton-educated Elliot looks like a copper-bottomed establishment Conservative. A nephew of the Duchess of Cornwall, Prince Charles’s wife, he’s the son of Simon Elliot, a Dorset landowner.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/05/access-tory-party-tycoon-funders-pandora-papers?fbclid=IwAR3_ANGJ0UBiN409itRqPUTIv10r4UXU2G74gT1WMjZLT2K2IJvVHhRIMQg

The unions ? They would sell their souls

Anniebach

Is it immoral for a Labour supporter to own a holiday home or
pay for private health care , to own two cars ?

No more than it is for a Tory voter to do so. Why would it be?

Personally, I think that all of those things are morally dubious, but I see no conflict between a Labour supporter wanting a fairer and more equitable society and simultaneously having a decent standard of living.

To suggest otherwise is rather facile, really. What are they supposed to do? Donate their salary to some vague fund that redistributes wealth? With no system behind it to ensure fairness, and no democratic decisions on how it show be spent?

Individuals can't really make a difference outside of charitable work (for those with the luxury of spare time) - it is voting for a government who will bring about difference that will make a difference.

It never ceases to amaze me the extent to which rich people go to save money: haven't they got enough?

Do any of us give the tax man more than we are legally obliged to? Would any of us refuse a legitimate way to save tax on the basis that they had quite enough money already?
I notice no-one answered my question upthread as to whether they would refuse to buy a house they liked if they found it was owed by a company and they could save stamp duty …

I wish I had the 312k they saved to buy a house tbh

Can anyone tell me why people actually want all this money? What would you do with it?

Once you have a home and enough to live a comfortable life, then what do you do with all the rest?

Well if you were a QC like Cherie you would Jane. Not sticking up for her, can’t stand her, but I believe she didn’t come from a very privileged background - father Tony Booth the actor who married’Elsie Tanner’.

Children, charities for instance Luckygirl. Surely everyone would like to amass what they could for their children and grandchildren, and charities would cease to exist without donors.

I would Germanshepardsnum

Good on you Annie!

Germanshepherdsmum

Do any of us give the tax man more than we are legally obliged to? Would any of us refuse a legitimate way to save tax on the basis that they had quite enough money already?
I notice no-one answered my question upthread as to whether they would refuse to buy a house they liked if they found it was owed by a company and they could save stamp duty …

I doubt that most of us do much more than wince when we see the 'offtakes' section of our PAYE payslips, really.

I have never had the opportunity to refuse a way to save tax - it has always been taken at source, as it is for most people.

The fact that these 'legitimate' savings are only open to those with other sources of income should be a red flag to those who make the tax rules. I'm sure that if they realised the unfairness of a system that only gives tax breaks to the rich, they would do something about it.

Oh.

No I mean as a renter I would like the 312k they saved so I could buy a house. It would make my life easier. Could they gift it to me?

I know, JJ! Imagine saving £312k on a single transaction - it's mind-boggling, really.

I too would love to buy a house, I would be free from Council
Care & Repair .