The matter of Angela Rayner's house sale isn't going away.....

Rayner's house was sold in March 2015, over nine years ago.

The HMRC investigation time limit is 4 years if an innocent error is suspected. Where mistakes in tax returns are deemed careless or negligent, the window extends to 6 years. Suspicion of deliberate tax evasion warrants an investigation period of 20 years. It would have to be a very serious breach to do that.

HMRC are not going to open an investigation. The police shouldn’t be wasting their time on what isn’t even going to be considered a civil crime - carelessness or negligence at most and possibly resulting from poor professional advice.

If a tax professional with all of the facts can determine how much tax she should have paid - (worse case scenario c £3,000) then an equal amount donated to a good cause should shut the media up.

I did my sums based on the numbers published in the press, Rayner may have had a taxable gain of 10,218 (see my post on page 2 ) but that could all be wiped out by costs of sale and money spent on improving the house which many former council tenants do soon after they buy. A new kitchen and bathroom could easily have cost £10,000. I see that the house was sold again fours years later in 2019. It had clearly had a lot of improvements but not necessarily all done by the 2019 vendors.

£3000 is peanuts compared to the excesses of Tory MPs. The same news cycle covered Michelle Donelan’s libel case which will cost the public £34,000. If we have to fund her stupidity then Rayner deserves a free pass on what sounds, at worst, like not understanding complex CGT tax laws. It appears that many of the media commentators don’t understand either.

As well as Ashcroft, I see Richard Holden is making a lot of noise about this. Sunak really should find him something better to do to stop him making a fool of himself again. One would think he had learned his lesson from wasting everyone’s time over Beergate. A man with a tiny majority of 1,146. Maybe his time in these dog days of government would be better spent looking for a new job.

do you really want these people in government when they really dislike the white majority in this country.
What a nasty world view you regularly share with us Freya5. Distorted, tribal and imo just wrong.

Yes Freya5 I do want them in power

mae13

I think "press freedom", as defined by The Daily Fail, really needs looking at. The editor spends most of the time bursting a blood vessel trying to smear anyone not a rabid, racist, mysoginistic Tory (who indulges their weird fetish of freely sending pics of their willy across an open public platform to anyone who asks).

The "Baroness" Mone and her hubby, Doug Barrowboy, have alledgedly deliberately drained the cash-starved NHS of multi-millions but that's been pretty much sidelined by the Murdoch Press.......mind you, the "Baroness" has been "strongly advised" by various Lords never to return to The House.

Whatever happens, Angela Rayner isn't in danger of being pre-judged and blackballed by the House of Lords for bringing disgrace upon the toffs!

So are we to to ignore whatever goes on on the sometimes discredited Labour Party,because you dislike and smear the reporters, and the Tory membership, accuse them of being of being rascists , of the Daily Mail. Diane Abbot has been shown to be a out and out racist, as has Mr Lammy. Do you really want these people in Government when they really dislike the white majority in this country. Oh and while we are at it, remember underpants Bryant, but that's OK, he's allowed to contine as an MP because he's a Labourite. His electorate need to be a little more choosy wouldn't you admit. Rayner likes to come across as holier than thou, apart from her mouth of course, let's see shall we. Dont worry, she'll probably get let off, as her and starmer where in beergate.

Excellent article, puts it all in perspective. if she has made a mistake
She’s also facing questions over whether she owes capital gains tax over the sale of her old council house back in 2015. Rayner swears not, insisting she has taken independent advice that confirms she doesn’t owe a penny.

Even if that advice somehow turns out to be wrong, then the sum involved – maybe £1,500 at most – is peanuts compared with the reportedly seven-figure sum that the former chancellor Nadhim Zahawi had to repay in his dispute with HMRC, or the fortune that the former Tory deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft (whose biography of Rayner started this hare running) must have saved during his years as a non-dom"

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/12/angela-rayner-tories-targeting-labour-deputy-tax-class-shaming

Interesting article from The Guardian.

I think "press freedom", as defined by The Daily Fail, really needs looking at. The editor spends most of the time bursting a blood vessel trying to smear anyone not a rabid, racist, mysoginistic Tory (who indulges their weird fetish of freely sending pics of their willy across an open public platform to anyone who asks).

The "Baroness" Mone and her hubby, Doug Barrowboy, have alledgedly deliberately drained the cash-starved NHS of multi-millions but that's been pretty much sidelined by the Murdoch Press.......mind you, the "Baroness" has been "strongly advised" by various Lords never to return to The House.

Whatever happens, Angela Rayner isn't in danger of being pre-judged and blackballed by the House of Lords for bringing disgrace upon the toffs!

If it's any help, Dan Neidle, a tax expert, wrote an article about the capital gains tax element. It seems it could be a grey area..

taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/02/29/rayner/

Casdon

Explains the massive discounting of Right to Buy since 2012 aka Cameron era.
www.ft.com/content/2726620e-b6e5-4547-b358-ff4fe175171e
Labour stopped Right to Buy in Wales because there were insufficient funds to replace diminishing council stock. They are also building new council houses, which I don’t believe is happening in England.

It's happening in some places on a small scale. I don't know all the details or exactly how it works, but some councils (including mine) have formed separate private companies, which have borrowed money (when interest rates were low) to build social housing. They're effectively acting as housing associations. The rents on their properties are low, although higher than council housing, and the rental income is used to pay off the loans and build more housing. If their tenants use Right to Buy (which some of them do), the proceeds of sales are ploughed back into building more. The problem with Right to Buy as it now operates is that the housing associations are being forced by the government to offer such huge discounts that they are losing money and being forced to increase rents to existing tenants to cover costs. It's worse for communities than Thatcher's original plan.

RosiesMaw

Iam64

I’ve no problem with Raynor buying her council house or with her belief the right to buy is bad policy

Apart from the fact that it takes social housing off the availability as social rental market and not infrequently is sold on at a generous profit-having been bought at a discounted price.
But surely the question here is why did she not pay CGT if a married couple can only designate ONE property as their home. Both she and her husband seem to have claimed one each and she “let”hers to a family memher.

If both spouses own properties as individuals before a marriage, there is a period when one property can be sold and CGT doesn't have to be paid. It's also perfectly legal for them to live apart. I don't know the details in this case, which is why I hope it's thoroughly investigated.

TinSoldier I'm disturbed to learn that the sale of social housing 'in very large numbers' is funding organised crime as a way to launder money. How is this done? I had understood that in order to buy a property, the sitting tenant must have been in situ for a good number of years, the property is sold to that tenant with whatever discount, and they cannot sell the property for a fixed term, which was about five years when a relative bought their house from the local authority. This would seem to be a lengthy and laborious way to fund illegal enterprise.

Hopefully this will be investigated thoroughly and findings released soon. It could be interesting.

Iam64

I’ve no problem with Raynor buying her council house or with her belief the right to buy is bad policy

Apart from the fact that it takes social housing off the availability as social rental market and not infrequently is sold on at a generous profit-having been bought at a discounted price.
But surely the question here is why did she not pay CGT if a married couple can only designate ONE property as their home. Both she and her husband seem to have claimed one each and she “let”hers to a family memher.

Oh.

Building.

I don't believe it is a bad policy as long as the money gained by Councils is ring-fenced and used for npbuilfing more social housing.

Iam64

I’ve no problem with Raynor buying her council house or with her belief the right to buy is bad policy

Me neither Iam.

Jane112

I'd be much more interested in the police investigating the £billions that the Tories have managed to divide amongst their mates over the past few years.

Don't hold your breath.

I’ve no problem with Raynor buying her council house or with her belief the right to buy is bad policy

But is Rayner denying ... All I can find is that she had proposed reforms to the additional market discounts of up to 60% the Tories introduced in 2012.

One of the serious concerns about sale of social housing now is that a very large number are being funded by organised crime as a way to launder money and then sold on to buy to let purchasers. The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) have estimated that 40% of resales end up as Private Rental Sector (PRS) contributing to the massive rise in what is claimed in housing benefit.

The CIH also found that the 60% discount far exceeds the overall rent payments made by the buyer/tenant prior to purchasing.

I'd be much more interested in the police investigating the £billions that the Tories have managed to divide amongst their mates over the past few years.

This is my county as an example. It’s not enough, but it demonstrates the commitment in these financially challenged times.
en.powys.gov.uk/article/13570/Completed-developments

Explains the massive discounting of Right to Buy since 2012 aka Cameron era.
www.ft.com/content/2726620e-b6e5-4547-b358-ff4fe175171e
Labour stopped Right to Buy in Wales because there were insufficient funds to replace diminishing council stock. They are also building new council houses, which I don’t believe is happening in England.

💨💨💨💨Casdon! It’s the unfairness of buying your own council house cheaply and denying others that right that astonishes me actually!

Pantglas2

Aspiration is for everybody

Agreed Growstuff (we sound like Thatcher’s children 😱) which is why Rayner is wrong to deny current council tenants in England the Right to Buy. Here in Wales Labour stopped aspiring homeowners since 2019.

My son has just finished his MSc on housing in Wales - I'll ask him how it's working out.

I still don't disagree with Rayner and am against Right to Buy in its current form.

Pantglas2

She’s always been staunch Labour Growstuff, having come into politics through the trade union route and would have been vehemently anti-Thatcher and what she stood for.

The idea that a council house sold at a big discount to a sitting tenant would produce enough funds to build another in the same area is absurd and is the argument of choice for all the Labour supporters who succumbed to Thatcher’s ploy.

I personally know of people who voted Tory in the 80s90s to ensure they could benefit and now complain there’s no social housing for their children and now grandchildren'. And of course they’re back to being Labour supporters!

No, it's not absurd. The proceeds could be put towards building new social housing in addition to the rent which would be collected. If loans need to be taken out, rent could be used over a number of years to pay off the loan (in addition to the capital from the sales), so the whole thing could be self-perpetuating.

PS. I've only once voted Labour in my life.