Best Of
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
Another reminder, if needed, why talk of a "united right" is so misguided. Farage is NOT a Conservative. He's a populist - a very different thing. Tories conserve things, populists break things.Raskin pointed out that his interviewee wasn't so much a "disgrace" as an anti-NATO shill for Putin. He showed his working out too.Has anyone heard Farage in Congress? Has anyone also heard Jamie Raskin and Hank Johnson own him.I listened to him and he was a disgrace
It turns out he was only in DC grifting for cash from Tech Bros opposed to the Online Safety Act.
The Conservatives need to keep their nerve and, in the words of Churchill, "keep buggerin' on".
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
She is the story. She is the Housing Minister. She made a housing error.Yes, declutter. What Tories did in government isn't the issue. What Labour said about what Tories did in government isn't the issue. Angela Rayner underpaid tax on the purchase of a flat. If it was an innocent error that anyone could have made she shouldn't lose her job over it. If it was negligent she probably should and if it was fraudulent she definitely should.Absolutely. What the Tories did is, in any case, utterly irrelevant to what happens nowLabours pious attitude in opposition left them vulnerable to any controversy in government. There have been scandals aplenty, and they only have themselves to blameWell nobody likes piety in anyone but a priest - but I'm not sure I'd want an Opposition (Lab or Con) going easy on Government scandals so as to create the space to misbehave in power themselves.
Whataboutery is completely inappropriate (from the perpetrators current or previous)
For the sake of the Government she should resign this portfolio, otherwise it goes on and on.
You might not have noticed but the media despise the Labour Government, and any fuel to that fire is best extinguished quickly.
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
To my mind, it would be a natural error, to consider that once you had disposed of the beneficial ownership of your previous property, a subsequently-bought property would not be an additional property, for stamp duty land tax purposes. In fact, logic would suggest that only a property which you have beneficial ownership of should count, for that purpose.The most read article on the BBC news article is positive for Rayner. Basically pins the blame on the three lawyers she consulted.It may be the lawyers' fault. Or it could be a SNAFU. But unless we are told what she was asked, what advice she sought and what information she gave them, we cannot know. Nor can the BBC unless it has seen all the relevant material which I'm willing to bet it hasn't.
She'll survive.
However, the law is not logical, in this case.
Sean_F
3
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
Yes, declutter. What Tories did in government isn't the issue. What Labour said about what Tories did in government isn't the issue. Angela Rayner underpaid tax on the purchase of a flat. If it was an innocent error that anyone could have made she shouldn't lose her job over it. If it was negligent she probably should and if it was fraudulent she definitely should.Absolutely. What the Tories did is, in any case, utterly irrelevant to what happens nowLabours pious attitude in opposition left them vulnerable to any controversy in government. There have been scandals aplenty, and they only have themselves to blameWell nobody likes piety in anyone but a priest - but I'm not sure I'd want an Opposition (Lab or Con) going easy on Government scandals so as to create the space to misbehave in power themselves.
Whataboutery is completely inappropriate (from the perpetrators current or previous)
kinabalu
3
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
The graffiti on Rayner’s flat is ugly and sad
But it also shows why she has to resign. There’s no point in carrying on. If she tries to cling on she will become a huge focus of public anger, the “one rule for me” hypocrite who embodies Labour lies
Whether through malice or mistake she made an unforgivable error for a housing minister, and one with a history of calling Tories “tax cheats” and demanding they resign
But it also shows why she has to resign. There’s no point in carrying on. If she tries to cling on she will become a huge focus of public anger, the “one rule for me” hypocrite who embodies Labour lies
Whether through malice or mistake she made an unforgivable error for a housing minister, and one with a history of calling Tories “tax cheats” and demanding they resign
Leon
5
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
A small wrinkle on the Raynor affair that I just noticed: the trust set up for her child is almost certainly a trust for a vulnerable person. Unlike the trusts people like TSE setup for their children, the tax treatment of these is different. Trusts like TSE‘s treats all income, CGT etc as accruing to the parent / trustees for tax purposes. For Trusts for vulnerable people the tax treatment calculates the taxes owed as if they had been earned by the vulnerable person instead of the trustees even though (IIRC) they are actually paid by the trustees - the trustees can then claim the difference in taxes owed back from HMRC if necessary.Very interesting- thanks for that.
All this will have been explained to Raynor at some length by her lawyers. It’s therefore not entirely surprising that she might have thought that, having transferred property to the vulnerable persons trust, the same exemptions would apply to stamp duty calculations. Unfortunately for her these exemptions for vulnerable trust-related taxes do not apply to include whether or not the parent is deemed to own a property owned by the trust for the purposes of calculating stamp duty.
One could even argue that, given that the government chose to exempt the parents / trustees from tax liabilities arising from trusts for vulnerable people, the omission of property ownership for the purposes of calculating stamp duty was an oversight & that it should have been included alongside all the other taxes: The whole point appears to be to make sure that the trustees do not carry any extra tax liability as a consequence of carrying out their duties as trustees for a vulnerable person.
Nevertheless, the law is what it is & the gov.uk guidance is clear: Raynor should have known that & if she was advised otherwise then she was extremely badly advised. Can she prove that she was badly advised by the professionals she consulted? If not, then I think she’s probably toast.
See https://www.gov.uk/trusts-taxes/trusts-for-vulnerable-people for some details.
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
Cats don't even require an interview. Hired!For ~£160k a year I have a cat I'd like to put forward. No Trust, but it does have occasional trust issues?But is there anyone else capable of failing to build 1.5 million homes?Is it possible Rayner could give up her housing brief and just stay as Deputy PM if she’s not found to have broken the ministerial code .She cannot be housing minister by the time of Reeves statement
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
That’s fair enough.Is it possible Rayner could give up her housing brief and just stay as Deputy PM if she’s not found to have broken the ministerial code .She cannot be housing minister by the time of Reeves statement
nico67
1
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
For ~£160k a year I have a cat I'd like to put forward. No Trust, but it does have occasional trust issues?But is there anyone else capable of failing to build 1.5 million homes?Is it possible Rayner could give up her housing brief and just stay as Deputy PM if she’s not found to have broken the ministerial code .She cannot be housing minister by the time of Reeves statement
Foss
2
Re: It’s Not About You – politicalbetting.com
But is there anyone else capable of failing to build 1.5 million homes?Is it possible Rayner could give up her housing brief and just stay as Deputy PM if she’s not found to have broken the ministerial code .She cannot be housing minister by the time of Reeves statement