How much trouble do people think Rayner is going to be in with the ethics advisor on her house dealings? I have no clue and would be interested if anyone has a handle on this and whether it is just a storm in a teacup/opponents making something out of nothing or something that could see her in real trouble?
The issue for me is contradictory declarations: he has told HMRC that Hove is her principal residence (stamp duty) as well as telling Tameside Council that it’s Manchester (council tax)
principal residence doesn't mean anything for council tax purposes
I don’t know how the UK rules work on this but could someone explain why this is the case? I’m presuming there is a good reason?
Surely you declare your principal residence for tax purposes, where you live for tax purposes, this would then be declared to the council for purposes of council tax. I would also imagine this is the same address for your employer and for your health records and so on.
If when you buy a new property you want to change your main residence to the new property why do you not have to also inform the council that this is now your main residence.
What are the rules with driving licences? Do they have to be addressed to your main residence, and does your car insurance? Don’t you have to inform the DVLA and insurers if you change your residence?
It seems utterly odd that you can claim to different official bodies different information.
Stamp duty is a tax you pay when you buy an asset. If an asset is a home, then the tax rate depends on a few factors, but if you declare your intention to use it as a 'principal residence' you can pay a lower rate.
Council tax is a tax paid by people who occupy a property, or if it is empty than by the owner of the property. You don't get to pick and choose whether or not you pay council tax.
How much trouble do people think Rayner is going to be in with the ethics advisor on her house dealings? I have no clue and would be interested if anyone has a handle on this and whether it is just a storm in a teacup/opponents making something out of nothing or something that could see her in real trouble?
The issue for me is contradictory declarations: he has told HMRC that Hove is her principal residence (stamp duty) as well as telling Tameside Council that it’s Manchester (council tax)
principal residence doesn't mean anything for council tax purposes
I don’t know how the UK rules work on this but could someone explain why this is the case? I’m presuming there is a good reason?
Surely you declare your principal residence for tax purposes, where you live for tax purposes, this would then be declared to the council for purposes of council tax. I would also imagine this is the same address for your employer and for your health records and so on.
If when you buy a new property you want to change your main residence to the new property why do you not have to also inform the council that this is now your main residence.
What are the rules with driving licences? Do they have to be addressed to your main residence, and does your car insurance? Don’t you have to inform the DVLA and insurers if you change your residence?
It seems utterly odd that you can claim to different official bodies different information.
Stamp duty is a tax you pay when you buy an asset. If an asset is a home, then the tax rate depends on a few factors, but if you declare your intention to use it as a 'principal residence' you can pay a lower rate.
Council tax is a tax paid by people who occupy a property, or if it is empty than by the owner of the property. You don't get to pick and choose whether or not you pay council tax.
How much trouble do people think Rayner is going to be in with the ethics advisor on her house dealings? I have no clue and would be interested if anyone has a handle on this and whether it is just a storm in a teacup/opponents making something out of nothing or something that could see her in real trouble?
The issue for me is contradictory declarations: he has told HMRC that Hove is her principal residence (stamp duty) as well as telling Tameside Council that it’s Manchester (council tax)
principal residence doesn't mean anything for council tax purposes
I don’t know how the UK rules work on this but could someone explain why this is the case? I’m presuming there is a good reason?
Surely you declare your principal residence for tax purposes, where you live for tax purposes, this would then be declared to the council for purposes of council tax. I would also imagine this is the same address for your employer and for your health records and so on.
If when you buy a new property you want to change your main residence to the new property why do you not have to also inform the council that this is now your main residence.
What are the rules with driving licences? Do they have to be addressed to your main residence, and does your car insurance? Don’t you have to inform the DVLA and insurers if you change your residence?
It seems utterly odd that you can claim to different official bodies different information.
Stamp duty is a tax you pay when you buy an asset. If an asset is a home, then the tax rate depends on a few factors, but if you declare your intention to use it as a 'principal residence' you can pay a lower rate.
Council tax is a tax paid by people who occupy a property, or if it is empty than by the owner of the property. You don't get to pick and choose whether or not you pay council tax.
Do HMO’s pay council tax ?
They do, although I believe the law changed recently on this to make it the landlord's responsibility to ensure it's paid rather than the tenants.
How much trouble do people think Rayner is going to be in with the ethics advisor on her house dealings? I have no clue and would be interested if anyone has a handle on this and whether it is just a storm in a teacup/opponents making something out of nothing or something that could see her in real trouble?
The issue for me is contradictory declarations: he has told HMRC that Hove is her principal residence (stamp duty) as well as telling Tameside Council that it’s Manchester (council tax)
principal residence doesn't mean anything for council tax purposes
I don’t know how the UK rules work on this but could someone explain why this is the case? I’m presuming there is a good reason?
Surely you declare your principal residence for tax purposes, where you live for tax purposes, this would then be declared to the council for purposes of council tax. I would also imagine this is the same address for your employer and for your health records and so on.
If when you buy a new property you want to change your main residence to the new property why do you not have to also inform the council that this is now your main residence.
What are the rules with driving licences? Do they have to be addressed to your main residence, and does your car insurance? Don’t you have to inform the DVLA and insurers if you change your residence?
It seems utterly odd that you can claim to different official bodies different information.
Stamp duty is a tax you pay when you buy an asset. If an asset is a home, then the tax rate depends on a few factors, but if you declare your intention to use it as a 'principal residence' you can pay a lower rate.
Council tax is a tax paid by people who occupy a property, or if it is empty than by the owner of the property. You don't get to pick and choose whether or not you pay council tax.
Do HMO’s pay council tax ?
Don't go there - really !!!
HMOs do pay Council Tax. In some cases each room has been defined as a Band A dwelling, and subject to its own Council Tax.
How much trouble do people think Rayner is going to be in with the ethics advisor on her house dealings? I have no clue and would be interested if anyone has a handle on this and whether it is just a storm in a teacup/opponents making something out of nothing or something that could see her in real trouble?
The issue for me is contradictory declarations: he has told HMRC that Hove is her principal residence (stamp duty) as well as telling Tameside Council that it’s Manchester (council tax)
principal residence doesn't mean anything for council tax purposes
I don’t know how the UK rules work on this but could someone explain why this is the case? I’m presuming there is a good reason?
Surely you declare your principal residence for tax purposes, where you live for tax purposes, this would then be declared to the council for purposes of council tax. I would also imagine this is the same address for your employer and for your health records and so on.
If when you buy a new property you want to change your main residence to the new property why do you not have to also inform the council that this is now your main residence.
What are the rules with driving licences? Do they have to be addressed to your main residence, and does your car insurance? Don’t you have to inform the DVLA and insurers if you change your residence?
It seems utterly odd that you can claim to different official bodies different information.
Stamp duty is a tax you pay when you buy an asset. If an asset is a home, then the tax rate depends on a few factors, but if you declare your intention to use it as a 'principal residence' you can pay a lower rate.
Council tax is a tax paid by people who occupy a property, or if it is empty than by the owner of the property. You don't get to pick and choose whether or not you pay council tax.
Do HMO’s pay council tax ?
They do, although I believe the law changed recently on this to make it the landlord's responsibility to ensure it's paid rather than the tenants.
I'm not familiar with changes.
But the situation has been that there was in law a "liable parties" with occupier at the top ... etc, and Councils went down the list.
How much trouble do people think Rayner is going to be in with the ethics advisor on her house dealings? I have no clue and would be interested if anyone has a handle on this and whether it is just a storm in a teacup/opponents making something out of nothing or something that could see her in real trouble?
The issue for me is contradictory declarations: he has told HMRC that Hove is her principal residence (stamp duty) as well as telling Tameside Council that it’s Manchester (council tax)
principal residence doesn't mean anything for council tax purposes
I don’t know how the UK rules work on this but could someone explain why this is the case? I’m presuming there is a good reason?
Surely you declare your principal residence for tax purposes, where you live for tax purposes, this would then be declared to the council for purposes of council tax. I would also imagine this is the same address for your employer and for your health records and so on.
If when you buy a new property you want to change your main residence to the new property why do you not have to also inform the council that this is now your main residence.
What are the rules with driving licences? Do they have to be addressed to your main residence, and does your car insurance? Don’t you have to inform the DVLA and insurers if you change your residence?
It seems utterly odd that you can claim to different official bodies different information.
Stamp duty is a tax you pay when you buy an asset. If an asset is a home, then the tax rate depends on a few factors, but if you declare your intention to use it as a 'principal residence' you can pay a lower rate.
Council tax is a tax paid by people who occupy a property, or if it is empty than by the owner of the property. You don't get to pick and choose whether or not you pay council tax.
Do HMO’s pay council tax ?
They do, although I believe the law changed recently on this to make it the landlord's responsibility to ensure it's paid rather than the tenants.
I'm not familiar with changes.
But the situation has been that there was in law a "liable parties" with occupier at the top ... etc, and Councils went down the list.
Funnily enough, many, many years ago I stayed in the Bell Hotel, Epping, for several days, on business.
I have to report that it was such a dump that me any my colleagues threatened to riot if we were ever put up there again.
You could have gone to the Epping Forest Hotel, formerly the County Hotel, where the Krays did much of their business deals. Now permanently closed, it seems.
Just maybe not come out again if you accidentally wandered into Ronnie and Reggie giving someone an offer they couldn't refuse
When it was a Best Western, I stayed there a few times, when I had to be back in east London having moved to the island. By then it had shed its underworld reputation and was a bog standard British hotel, where you got a basic room and a decent greasy buffet English breakfast and got to stay near London for less than £100. With nice walks nearby in the forest for the dog. Why it’s now closed I don’t know - maybe you should go investigate?
That must be fairly recent.
When I was doing the "on the road" 6 weeks with BT Engineers installing telephone exchanges in one of my Thin Sandwich summers, subsistence was £13.30 a day, which had to cover bed and breakfast, and anything else. And I'm only a Gen-Xer.
Many many moons ago I was on subsistence with PO Telephones, during my apprenticeship , pre BT and it was generous, we lived like kings.
Spongeing off a state monopoly, malc ?
Working my butt off, if only the raj's nowadays had the same work ethics
70's were happy days Nigel, especially if you were a hard grafter
How much trouble do people think Rayner is going to be in with the ethics advisor on her house dealings? I have no clue and would be interested if anyone has a handle on this and whether it is just a storm in a teacup/opponents making something out of nothing or something that could see her in real trouble?
Starmer has been fairly quick to jettison people if they have done something improper. That's probably her biggest worry. But no one is going to care about stories in the Telegraph who clearly have it out for our Ange. And the party management headache it would cause is also an issue.
It’s not just headlines in the telegraph though now. It’s the lead story on the Today programme, even ahead of, shock horror, US news. So it’s moving more into the zone where it becomes an issue for Starmer or dies but it’s not being ignored by all but the Telegraph.
Well I agree if it becomes a story on the BBC then it has more substance and is more of a problem. On the BBC weabite it is reported as Tories call for investigation of her tax affairs, which is not a worrying headline for her.
Isn’t that how all these stories go though that the opposition calls for an enquiry, then we have enquiry and then we have result.
Story rumbles through each stage and is either low level damaging as the public don’t look at the detail but just think more MPs taking the piss or it results in tearful statement and promise to pay the difference and learn lessons or thirdly they have actually broken the rules so have to be punished with loss of ministerial job/removal of whip.
The more it’s on the BBC the more people just hear that “the Housing Minister might have played the tax rules to save £40k for another house.” It’s not remotely a good look.
No -> opposition calls for inquiry and then they are ignored is how it normally goes.
In any case, there's no chance of an inquiry because its not that complicated an issue. If she has done something dodgy, and the story keeps rumbling, Starmer will sack her. He's not going to want to hold an inquiry knowing that it will find she has broken the rules.
Rayner has certainly rather stupidly blotted her copy book, but has her own mandate as Deputy Leader. She can be sacked from cabinet, but not from that position. Indeed such a power struggle could see a coup against Starmer.
I think she is pretty safe, but it doesn't look good if she wants to be next leader.
she is a trougher of teh worst kind, a hypocrite to go along with her troughing
Comments
Council tax is a tax paid by people who occupy a property, or if it is empty than by the owner of the property. You don't get to pick and choose whether or not you pay council tax.
HMOs do pay Council Tax. In some cases each room has been defined as a Band A dwelling, and subject to its own Council Tax.
It gets VERY complicated.
But the situation has been that there was in law a "liable parties" with occupier at the top ... etc, and Councils went down the list.