Angela Rayner

ajohn said:
Where it points out a number of possible reasons why none needed to be paid. Plus doesn't have actual figures for some of the details.
Click to expand...
The story has since developed since the original analysis. Fro example we know that the four year PRR is optimistic

for some of the time Rayner owned the property, it was exempt. Before she moved in with her husband, it was her sole home – so that’s at least four years of exemption. And then the rules at the time gave another 18 months of exemption at the end of her ownership. So the exemption applies for about 48 per cent of the time she owned it.
Click to expand...

We also can see from more detailed analysis of the rules that the following doesn’t apply.

She had significant “enhancement expenditure”, which means she in fact had no capital gain. I estimate she’d need to have spent about £23,000 if she moved into her husband’s house in 2009, or £15,000 if she moved in in 2010. I don’t know what her actual enhancement expenditure was, or even if she had any. This, however, seems the most plausible route to her having no capital gains tax liability.
Click to expand...

All the other scenarios are dismissed in the article.
 
motorbiking said:
The story has since developed since the original analysis. Fro example we know that the four year PRR is optimistic



We also can see from more detailed analysis of the rules that the following doesn’t apply.



All the other scenarios are dismissed in the article.
Click to expand...
Have you got the official outcome.

According to you it sounds cut and dried. But that link doesn't......

don’t know what her actual enhancement expenditure was, or even if she had any. This, however, seems the most plausible route to her having no capital gains tax liability.
 
We do know what the rules are for allowable enhancement expenditure and it’s not easy to argue decorating and refreshing a functional kitchen and bathroom is capital expenditure.

It’s almost like the tax man has thought about the tricks people will pull to argue no capital gains tax is due.
 
motorbiking said:
We do know what the rules are for allowable enhancement expenditure and it’s not easy to argue decorating and refreshing a functional kitchen and bathroom is capital expenditure.

It’s almost like the tax man has thought about the tricks people will pull to argue no capital gains tax is due.
Click to expand...
But we don't know the actual outcome do we?

The police and hmrc are investigating and its obviously not straightforward or we would know the result.

You are just guessing and hoping, nothing legal based at all
 
It’s not straight forward if your story keeps changing as the excuses are discredited.

Of course there is nothing public about any checks HMRC are doing on either Angela or her ex husbands tax filings. I’ve also said the police review will go nowhere as it’s likely that the electoral offences are out of time and I can’t see them pursuing fraud.

At least her lies and hypocrisy are out in public and she’ll think twice about demanding the next political opponent who made errors in their tax, resign.

But what is most fun is seeing the resident lefty tax experts and morality police try to defend her with whataboutery.
 
129 pages

And the right wing grifters are still desperately banging on about a nothing story.

Ive never been a fan of Angela Rayner, but it’s highly amusing to see how she winds up the right :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 
motorbiking said:
she’ll think twice about demanding the next political opponent who made errors in their tax, resign
Click to expand...
So now we getting to the truth

You think Conservative MPs and their mates should get away with their dishonestly and dirty dealings.


Hilarious how you brand Rayner as a terrible criminal, yet try and make out corrupt Tories just “made an error in their tax”


Tribalism at its finest

MBK says: “rich people should be allowed to get away with it, it is their right”
 
motorbiking said:
It’s not straight forward if your story keeps changing as the excuses are discredited.

Of course there is nothing public about any checks HMRC are doing on either Angela or her ex husbands tax filings. I’ve also said the police review will go nowhere as it’s likely that the electoral offences are out of time and I can’t see them pursuing fraud.

At least her lies and hypocrisy are out in public and she’ll think twice about demanding the next political opponent who made errors in their tax, resign.

But what is most fun is seeing the resident lefty tax experts and morality police try to defend her with whataboutery.
Click to expand...
The most important thing is to KEEP on demanding taxes are correct, and punished if guilty.

Who, and where, is defending her? Absolutely nobody.

Who has found her guilty without all the facts? MBK !

Do you always use guesswork when doing legal work? Why ? Do you think you have all the information needed?
 
Notch7 said:
So now we getting to the truth

You think Conservative MPs and their mates should get away with their dishonestly and dirty dealings.


Hilarious how you brand Rayner as a terrible criminal, yet try and make out corrupt Tories just “made an error in their tax”


Tribalism at its finest

MBK says: “rich people should be allowed to get away with it, it is their right”
Click to expand...
Lying again..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top