Goodness - golden boy Sunak now less popular than Starmer!

Yes it's legal but it's fair game for political comment - she is after all the wife of the Chancellor!

The chancellor obviously benefits from her millions with his many luxury homes. I think they are currently on holiday in their millionaires apartment in California.

vegansrock

The chancellor obviously benefits from her millions with his many luxury homes. I think they are currently on holiday in their millionaires apartment in California.

He was seen in Welwyn Garden City yesterday at a hospital visit

Thank you rosie1959 I though I saw that somewhere.

I have to admit that I do wonder why we are just now hearing about the Sunaks’ slightly questionable finanacial arrangements. Surely they have been known about to the HMRC and the treasury. Could it be an attempt by someone to scupper RS’s leadership chances if Boris is forced out if fined for his role in Partygate? I don’t know but politics is a dirty game.

Niobe you have just hit the nail firmly on the head.

Mr. Sunak’s wife is not doing anything illegal, she pays all taxes due in her earnings in the U.K.

Obviously Mr. Sunak as PM is a worry to some.

The selling of council houses was supposed to raise revenue to invest in new public housing policy.... part one happened....then it all got privatised with housing associations taking over
responsibility for 'affordable rental' homes which started off being good social enterprise type businesses but are less so now. We, with my DHs siblings, could have helped my in laws buy their flat in Wandsworth but we would not join in , on principle. It did not affect them but we might have made a bit of profit from a subsequent sale..but we could not sell our souls...

Niobe

I have to admit that I do wonder why we are just now hearing about the Sunaks’ slightly questionable finanacial arrangements. Surely they have been known about to the HMRC and the treasury. Could it be an attempt by someone to scupper RS’s leadership chances if Boris is forced out if fined for his role in Partygate? I don’t know but politics is a dirty game.

Johnson and Sunak have been briefing against each other for a long time. Not that it matters to those of us who take an interest in politics. It's been glaringly obvious for the past 3 years that neither are fit for the office of PM. None of the current cabinet are.

Pantglas2

It’ll be the same people who didn’t have a good word to say about him even when they were grabbing all that furlough money.

I have friends who bought their council houses and still hate Thatcher for depleting social housing stock!

And you don't understand their point of view? I don't envy those who are friends of those with such a narrow point of view.

There is nothing illegal in what the Sunak's are doing.

Mrs Sunak is still a citizen of India, not of this country. There is also a certain morality in paying tax where the money is made. However, I would question whether she can have allegiance to this country when a citizen of a country that, at the moment, is very much an "old friend" of Russia and provides her with a very good life.

None of that would matter if her husband did not have intimate knowledge of the future planning of our country's economy. In this instance, I would also be concerned that he will know the very fundamentals of how this country is supporting Ukraine.

I think we have to hope he doesn't work at home.

Sunak's Sunaks

Council houses should never have been sold, and definitely not at such high discount. People we know bought at ridiculous price of £6k in 1985 and sold at a huge profit.
Housing wasn't replaced. Now private rentals are much higher than council rents and the government has to pay for those on benefits. Doesn't make sense.

She does not get non-domicile status bestowed on her, she has to actively apply for it, likewise she can give up non domicile for tax purposes at any time and pay tax in the U.K. From memory, HMRC apply a sort of suck it and see with regard to non-domicile.

So if you have your main home in the U.K. and spend the majority if your time in the U.K. over a number of years, together with things like you family bring resident and educated here plus other indicators, than you claim for non-domicile can be rescinded.

The council house sell-off was a bribe, pure and simple. It appealed to the baser side of human nature, but was 100% in keeping with the‘ no such thing as society’ ethos of the time. Those who could grab a fistful of ‘wonga’ could see plenty of others doing the same, and whilst yes, it was greedy, given that every second conversation was about house prices and the ‘property ladder’ it was understandable. I know people who did very well out of it, particularly those who ‘helped their parents’ to buy and then pocketed the publicly-funded windfall a few years later. I know others who bought them couldn’t afford the maintenance, and watched neighbours get new kitchens and rewires whist their own houses fell into disrepair. I’m sure we all know young people who are really struggling to get a house now, as they are paying private landlords huge rents to live in what used to be ‘social’ housing. The luck of the draw for individuals, but for the cohesion of society (which I do believe exists) it was an unmitigated disaster.

As for Sunak giving to food banks - wouldn’t that be seen as support for a system that relies on the charity of individuals (or in many cases the poor doing without so that the poorer don’t starve)? What government wants to take ownership of this third-world state of affairs by publicly donating?

An interesting read, quite short.
www.mondaq.com/advicecentre/content/3132/UK-Resident-Non-Domiciled-Individuals-A-Beneficial-Tax-Regime

According to the Guardian 12% of those in the richest areas of London are non doms.

The article is worth reading.

It does seem unfair that the super rich can do this.

It’s well off piste to continue to discuss social housing but here I go.
Councils were not allowed to use the money from the sale of its housing stock to build more. Many ex council houses are now owned by landlords who rent them out privately. I’ve seen people evicted by the council for drug dealing, move into these private rented and continue to deal.
Housing associations were also forced to sell housing stock to tenants.
We need more social housing at reasonable rent, with security for tenants. The buy your social housing legislation should be ditched

I have been reading a Gov. briefing paper on how to determine whether an individual is domiciled in the U.K. for tax purposes, and so far I think Mrs Sunak fits that billShe may be claiming on a remittance basis, but I still can’t think how.

The Sunak’s don’t, as far as I can find - and I could be wrong and google isn’t complete but I can’t find that they have a family residence in India.

Copy from briefing paper

2.4 The circumstances in which individuals are treated as UK resident for tax purposes include the following:
• they spend 183 days or more here in any tax year or more than 90 days on average over a period of up to 4 years;
• they come to the UK intending to live here permanently or for at least three years;
• they come to the UK for a purpose (for example employment) that will mean that they remain here for at least two years (whether or not, in a particular year, they spend 183 days here); and
• they usually live in the UK and go abroad for short periods, for example on business trips.

To revert to non domestic status, it has nothing whatsoever to do with citizenship. Anyone British born and bred can claim it if they fulfil the extraordinarily vague requirements.

Richard Murphy explains
That’s because non-dom status is about where a person’s natural home is. Essentially, it is a test based on the evidence that they are only temporarily resident in the UK because they retain the intention to return to another place, which is their natural home.

The whole thread is worth reading.

mobile.twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1511964441545428993

Murphy says there is a difference between being resident for tax purposes and claiming non domestic status, Wwmk2. It's all in the thread I posted the link to.

He also says, GG13 that having non domestic status is not evidence of having paid the tax elsewhere...

Sorry, didn't notice that my phone keeps changing non dom to non domestic. It is, of course, meant to be non domicile.

Thanks maize must have a look.

Of course I understand people wanting to better themselves DaisyAnne - it’s the hypocrisy I can’t get my head around!

The tories I know who bought their council houses and traded up etc aren’t the ones moaning that their kids can’t get social housing and the Labour devotees are!

It’s all very well saying more houses should’ve been built with the proceeds but because of the discounts given to long standing tenants they couldn’t have replaced more than 10% of housing stock.

So we are where we are because folks looked after their own interest - Thatcher was right if she said there’s no such thing as society, after all!

The whole system is archaic - you can live at no 11 Downing Street, claim you live elsewhere to avoid paying taxes into the treasury of which your husband is the chancellor. Stinks.

To be a nom dom vegansrock is not claiming that your main residence is not in U.K. it is that your main source of income is outside of the U.K.

This law goes back to the 1700’s apparently, so plenty of time for various Governments to have amended it.