Angela Rayner

blup said:
This is a slow burn for AR, starmy will doubtless wield the axe if or when it becomes necessary.
Click to expand...
I doubt it

Ask yourself why Conservatives are going after AR….because she is popular with the voters and she is a threat to Tories.

Why do you see everything through the lens of hating Starmer
 
blup said:
Living together in the guidance includes permanent separation, if she never lived with him in the first place that would apply, unless there is a presumption that married couples live together. But that would discriminate against people's freedom to make their own marriage arrangements.
Click to expand...
Until recently divorcing couples ended up with capital gains tax bills on disposals, if the family home grew in value once it was no longer the primary residence. The guidance applies to them, not newly weds who choose to dual home. If the divorce is within 3 years of separation or subject to a court order there is a no gain no loss model applied. None of this applies to ARs situation.

By her own admission, she was not living separately.

There are significant tax benefits for married couples, they are not discriminated against. Legally, marriage is like a merger of two companies. Their assets become joint and mingled, they can pass assets to each other as they wish without tax. However, the downside means they cannot expect to have two homes, when it comes to disposal and capital gains tax.
 
Mottie said:
Let me remind you of your first post in this thread on Angela Raynor.
Click to expand...
That looks like a topical comment on the current AR issue, to me.
You will of course disagree, merely in order to take an opposing stance to me, not because of any other real reason.
 
JonathanM said:
I think, even if that were the case, they would be caught by the following part. It would be very hard to argue that they got married and the marriage immediately broke down. Also, there has never been a suggestion that the marriage had actually broken down. Indeed, AR says that, in 2015, they fully moved in together after she sold her house.
Click to expand...
Was her house the nominated primary residence for them both? We don't know.
Did her husband own his house outright at the time? We don't know.

There's umpteen things about the issue that we don't know.
It's trial by social media, and the Tories and their supporters are milking it for all its worth.

They're reduced to trumpeting the DM headlines these days.

The most reliable information I can find on a quick trawl:
  • AR sold her property in March 2015 for £127,500. So a gain of £48,500 before we consider costs of acquisition/disposal (such as estate agent fees) and improvements such as extensions etc.
  • MR’s property was sold in April 2016 for £145,250. We don’t know the purchase date or price.
Click to expand...
taxpolicy.org.uk

Did Angela Rayner fail to pay CGT on her house sale?

There is currently press speculation that Labour Deputy Leader Angela Rayner failed to pay CGT on her house sale. Ms Rayner’s statement suggests she may have misunderstood the law.
taxpolicy.org.uk taxpolicy.org.uk

It's easily possible that AR's house was sold, MR's property was bought outright, then sold.
No CGT incurred.
A married couple who own more than one home are free to choose which is their “principal residence” for CGT purposes by sending a nomination to HMRC within two years of the situation arising.
Click to expand...
taxpolicy.org.uk

Did Angela Rayner fail to pay CGT on her house sale?

There is currently press speculation that Labour Deputy Leader Angela Rayner failed to pay CGT on her house sale. Ms Rayner’s statement suggests she may have misunderstood the law.
taxpolicy.org.uk taxpolicy.org.uk

In the case of failure to pay GGT it is not an offence:
First, the tax system is complicated, and lots of people accidentally pay the wrong amount of tax (I’ve done it myself). That’s not a crime. It’s not a crime even if you’re careless or negligent. Ignorance is a defence to the crime of tax evasion. Calls for prosecutions for tax evasion were silly when we were talking about Nadhim Zahawi; they’re plain daft when we’re talking about Angela Rayner.
Click to expand...
taxpolicy.org.uk

Did Angela Rayner fail to pay CGT on her house sale?

There is currently press speculation that Labour Deputy Leader Angela Rayner failed to pay CGT on her house sale. Ms Rayner’s statement suggests she may have misunderstood the law.
taxpolicy.org.uk taxpolicy.org.uk

In addition any costs of improvement would easily negate any CGT applied if the worst case scenario was reality.
The CGT annual exemption amount for 2014/15 was £11,000. Meaning a taxable gain of about £5k and CGT of about £1.5k.

And if AR had spent £15k or more on improvements, there would be no gain.
Click to expand...
taxpolicy.org.uk

Did Angela Rayner fail to pay CGT on her house sale?

There is currently press speculation that Labour Deputy Leader Angela Rayner failed to pay CGT on her house sale. Ms Rayner’s statement suggests she may have misunderstood the law.
taxpolicy.org.uk taxpolicy.org.uk
 
I think that what upsets Labour apologists the most when Labour politicians are caught avoiding tax is that they aren’t able to avoid amounts as large as some of the better connected Tories. That’ll all change if they ever got in a position of power. Just you wait and see.
 
Mottie said:
"This article is more than 9 months old"

Never said it couldn’t. Old news. Is the internet running slow in France this morning?
Click to expand...
It's an extremely relevant article to your, "they would stab each other in the back" irrespective of the age of the article.

Your moaning about the difference between could and would is pointless.
"Could" is a verb of permission or possibility, whereas "would" is a verb of intent. Your opinion of their intent is your imagination.

In the instance of Boris being metaphorically stabbed in the back, it was a case of historical reality, not a hypothetical possibility.
 
Notch7 said:
I doubt it

Ask yourself why Conservatives are going after AR….because she is popular with the voters and she is a threat to Tories.

Why do you see everything through the lens of hating Starmer
Click to expand...
Its a difficult one for him on his relentless quest for power, on the one hand she is dispensable as a left winger, but useful as the token prescott type northern wall socialist with a grand title but no real power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top