Rayner cleared.

Cause it's a bittersweet symphony, that's life...
Tryna make ends meet, you're a slave to money then you die...
I'll take you down the only road I've ever been down...
You know, the one that takes you to the places where all the veins meet, yeah!
No change, I can change....

eazybee’s contempt for any Labour politician.

You need to get your facts right.
Not any Labour politician.
My contempt is reserved for Angela Rayner.

Informative article 4 hours ago in the Guardian

www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/28/angela-rayner-cleared-of-criminal-wrongdoing-over-sale-of-home

Will HMRC act?
“In a statement, Greater Manchester police (GMP) said any allegations that Rayner should have paid capital gains tax or council tax would not fall under their jurisdiction, and that they had shared details of their investigation with the local council, Stockport, and HMRC.
The Guardian understands that neither of these bodies plan to take action

"“It is understood that HMRC also looked into the issue,

at Rayner’s request,

and has confirmed there is no capital gains tax liability, meaning no action will be taken.”

Police fed up of being used by politicians to point score:
"“Michael Barton, the former chief constable of Durham police,said such inquiries were concerning. “When did party politicians start thinking it was a good idea to pressurise the police – sometimes it looks like a commission – into fanciful investigations when the police are under such huge strain?
“It boils down to trying to use the police to embarrass their political rivals and they should know better. I can see the pressure chief constables are under from senior politicians and certain allies in the media.”

You didn’t imply that, winterwhite. I like AR, and think she does have integrity as well as vigour and spirit. Sorry - these threads don’t bring out the best in anyone.

Wish I'd never mentioned the wretched word verve
Now I've got that rock band on my mind, winterwhite

I'm not sure that Angela Rayner does have that vigour and spirit needed as a foil to Starmer's appearance of stolidness.

Wish I'd never mentioned the wretched word verve.

Of course integrity, soundness and clarity are the most important elements in an election campaign. I didn't mean to imply that they weren't. But AR will inject vigour and spirit that seemed to me to have been lacking. That's all.

Freya5

Dinahmo

eazybee

Well, that is a surprise.
Not.
Like she and Starmer being cleared of having a picnic during covid.

It wasn't a picnic. It was a supper after a constituency meeting.

It was a booze up.

It was confirmed by the police to be a legal gathering, permitted under the Covid regulations operating at the time. That is the material point.

Dinahmo

eazybee

Well, that is a surprise.
Not.
Like she and Starmer being cleared of having a picnic during covid.

It wasn't a picnic. It was a supper after a constituency meeting.

It was a booze up.

winterwhite

Thank you, Doodledog. -vigour, enthusiasm, liveliness and animation- have not characterised the Labour campaign so far.

No problem.

I'm not sure that a political campaign is enhanced by verve (I'd rather have integrity), but I'm happy to help.

Some O/P's encourage mudslinging for the sake of it?

Wheniwasyourage

Be fair Germanshepherdsmum, you are never going to vote Labour - you have told us more than once that you are going to vote Tory, as you are perfectly entitled to do - so what difference does it make to you what Angela Rayner does? You had an interest in whether she would be cleared or not, as we all did, but if other voters think she will bring verve to the campaign, they are entitled to do so!

Well, I'm not going to vote Tory - but I'm still very interested in what Sunak does and what people say or think about him (and others in the party) so I think GSM can have an opinion on Rayner - and Labour!

I don’t think that the amount of money is here nor there.If AR
Has done anything wrong then it needs to come out regardless.
If she hasn’t then fine.
Circling the wagons around her does no good at all, and would posters do the same for anyone in a different political party, in all honesty?
Things have to be investigated for the good of all.

Mud slinging - yes I agree Cossy. I may simply being tribal but it does seem to emirate more from one side

Dinahmo

I know. But there are some Tories who will never change their minds despite the info being available.

But that’s ok and entirely their right.

It just appears some OPs know everything about everything.

I know some about some and will always admit if I’m wrong.

Sadly our GE and politics seem all about mud slinging

I know. But there are some Tories who will never change their minds despite the info being available.

Honestly Dinahmo, we are knocking our heads on brick walls when we try to tell posters who share eazybee’s contempt for any Labour politician their facts aren’t accurate.

Germanshepherdsmum

I know a lot more than you might think about the HMRC inquiry branch, of which I think you were not a member. I will simply say that the amount in question is not the deciding factor in pursuing a prosecution. The person from whom I have my information was until recently a very senior official in the inquiry branch. If people’s tax affairs were confidential would we know so much about Zahawi’s settlement? The decision to prosecute is above your pay grade wwm, admit it.

Are there many left at a senior level? I doubt. They all left long ago to work in the private sector.

eazybee

Well, that is a surprise.
Not.
Like she and Starmer being cleared of having a picnic during covid.

It wasn't a picnic. It was a supper after a constituency meeting.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m sure it does, but AR counts as a big fish.

On an MP's salary (plus a bit more for being shadow deputy leader??) Hardly a big fish.

I think that many people will not be aware that there is a finite period of ownership of one's PPR if one lives elsewhere.

The house was bought in 2007. She sold it in 2015, The gain was £48k. The assessable gain is calculated on the formula:

Gain = period of occupation + 9 months
period of ownership

As I do not know the exact purchase and sale dates I am working on whole years. So the period of allowable occupation was 45 months (36 +9) and the period of ownership was 96 months so the theoretical gain was £22.5k.

The CGT exemption in 2015/16 was £11,100 so her taxable gain would have been £11.4k.

When she was chosen to be a parliamentary candidate she was a Union official, having worked her way up through the ranks. No idea what her salary was at that time but assuming that it was below the BR her CGT gain would have been £2,28k by my calcs. I'm not far off the £3k mentioned in the press.

I have recently done a tax calc on the transfer of a 1/2 share of a house in London. Unfortunately my client did not check
with me and he was more than 9 months over the period of occupation and so had a large CGT liability. He did not know about this nor did his expensive London property solicitor tell him. Just saying!!

Whitewavemark2

Tell you what eazybee. Il take your £3k (the absolute maximum due if Rayner owed anything) and raise it by £3000000 penalty paid by Zahawi ( guess what the principle sum was!! Well don’t because I can’t confirm it.

It’s also unlikely to have harmed Rayner (or Starmer given his support for her).

My conclusion is that this situation has done her no harm at all. However, the haters will continue to hate, and her supporters will continue to support. It changes nothing

I agree Casdon. We can all ‘discuss’ this until we’re blue in the face, but those who didn’t like AR before, still don’t like here and vice versa. What I’ve learned from the N&P thread is that many of us are worlds apart, and nothing will change that.

Tell you what eazybee. Il take your £3k (the absolute maximum due if Rayner owed anything) and raise it by £3000000 penalty paid by Zahawi ( guess what the principle sum was!! Well don’t because I can’t confirm it.