Rayner hits back at ‘hypocrisy’ claims over Right-to-Buy
2 years ago | 17 comments
Angela Rayner faces CGT questions over council house sale
10:03 AM, 27th February 2024, 2 years ago
12
Categories:
Angela Rayner, Labour’s shadow housing secretary, is coming under growing scrutiny as questions emerge over her potential liability for Capital Gains Tax (CGT) following the sale of her former council house.
The controversy has escalated with allegations that she provided misleading information about her living arrangements.
Ms Rayner, who purchased the property through the Right-to-Buy scheme in 2007, had previously vowed to reform RTB if she assumed office, leading to accusations of hypocrisy.
The Daily Mail reports that sources close to the MP maintain that she was not subject to the tax when she sold the house in Stockport, Manchester, back in 2015.
Raised concerns about Rayner’s residency status
However, the Conservative Party has raised concerns about Rayner’s residency status and neighbours claim she moved out of the property in 2009, prompting the Tories to write to her seeking clarification.
One Tory MP has also requested that Greater Manchester Police launch an inquiry after discrepancies emerged in her official addresses.
The timeline reveals that Ms Rayner remained on the electoral register at the ex-council house until its sale in 2015.
In 2010, she married Mark Rayner, who owned a separate home and Ms Rayner claims she did not move in with him until 2015 when she became an MP.
That leaves questions over their five-year separation.
Issue revolves around Ms Rayner’s electoral registration accuracy
Critics say the central issue revolves around Ms Rayner’s electoral registration accuracy during that period since providing false information carries the risk of imprisonment and substantial fines.
Also, her potential liability for capital gains tax hinges on whether the property did serve as her primary residence.
Tax regulations allow individuals to claim Private Residence Relief even if they do not physically reside in the property, provided they spent some time there.
A Labour spokesman told the Daily Mail: “Angela was registered to vote at the home she owned and lived in. The Tories are once again wasting everyone’s time with political game-playing.”
Calls for Angela Rayner to face a police probe
Meanwhile, calls are mounting for Greater Manchester Police to investigate Angela Rayner over the details of her living circumstances before selling her former council home.
Tory MP James Daly has written to the force, saying: “There is a strong public interest in looking into this matter.”
A spokesman for the Electoral Commission said: “Normally a person is resident at an address if it is their permanent home address. Whether someone is eligible to be on the register at an address is for the relevant electoral registration officer.
“It is an offence to knowingly provide false information in the voter registration application form. If convicted, a person may be imprisoned for up to six months and/or face an unlimited fine. This would be a matter for the police to investigate.”
Tags:
Angela Rayner, Angela Rayner council house sale, Capital Gains Tax, CGT, council house, labour, Labour housing policy scrutiny, Political residency allegations, Right to Buy scheme controversy, Shadow Housing Secretary
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
or
Previous Article
Build to Rent homes surge in popularity and market shareNext Article
What is contents insurance for landlords?Related Articles
Rayner vows to ban S21 ‘no-fault’ evictions on day one of a Labour government
2 years ago | 17 comments
Rayner’s no-nonsense warning to landlords using Section 21
2 years ago | 30 comments
Member Since January 2022 - Comments: 267
12:22 PM, 27th February 2024, About 2 years ago
Interesting!
Maybe a major overhaul TO SIMPLIFY of all the tax rules is urgently required.
Member Since November 2015 - Comments: 584
12:28 PM, 27th February 2024, About 2 years ago
What absolute balls. She deliberately stayed registered to vote there so she could avoid tax! Call me cynical but if she was living there for 5 years while her new husband lived elsewhere I’ll show my a*se on the town hall steps…
Member Since December 2021 - Comments: 43
1:52 PM, 27th February 2024, About 2 years ago
Do as I say, not as I do.
Member Since February 2024 - Comments: 6
1:54 PM, 27th February 2024, About 2 years ago
Where is Dan Neidle now? Oh wait, he’s neutral but only investigates tories…
Member Since May 2014 - Comments: 620
2:18 PM, 27th February 2024, About 2 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Barbaracus at 27/02/2024 – 13:52
Not a good idea to throw stones if you live in glass houses Angela.
Member Since December 2023 - Comments: 1587
12:50 AM, 28th February 2024, About 2 years ago
Typical attitude of corrupt MPs. There are plenty of them.
Member Since May 2021 - Comments: 392
1:32 PM, 28th February 2024, About 2 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Kate Mellor at 27/02/2024 – 12:28
Please supply date & time ??
Member Since December 2022 - Comments: 82
4:06 PM, 29th February 2024, About 2 years ago
If she cannot show that the property continued to be her PPR after her marriage it sounds as though she is at risk of (1) accusation of the offence of false registration, and (2) tax and penalties by HMRC for evasion (not avoidance) of CGT for which the maximum penalty is 7 years or an unlimited fine. If she has lied on any return or communication with HMRC then there is even the possibility of a charge of cheating the public revenue for which the maximum sentence is life in prison or an unlimited fine.
If the property continued to be her PPR after her marriage there must be significant records of this including (crucially) payment of council tax, correspondence, payment of utility bills for the address including broadband connection and TV licence, records of deliveries of online purchases, land line telephone calls made to and from the property, photos taken at the property by herself, her family, and friends….. lots of evidence. So it should be easy for her to prove she did not commit either offence.
On the other hand….
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2021
2:29 PM, 22nd March 2024, About 2 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Michael Crofts at 29/02/2024 – 16:06
You don’t just cheat the public revenue by avoiding CGT: You also cheat the public revenue by taking a 25% discount on a council house and not using it as your home.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3538 - Articles: 5
3:34 PM, 22nd March 2024, About 2 years ago
I don’t actually care what she claims she did or didn’t do, I just want this lingering in the news for as long as possible. This may just be one of those occasions where the deeper it gets looked into the more will be found.
For a ‘confirmed socialist’, the fact she bought the council house then sold at a profit later says more than anything else, and if she was a landlord at some point to because she didn’t live in the property then this is just pure gold – evidence to be used and rehashed when it comes to her claims of all rogue Landlords needing to be shot.
Did she actually illegally let the property when she said she was living in it?? She has a lot more questions to answer as she tries to get herself out of the CGT hole…
Like a dose of the clap (I understand) – this wont go away easily. .Keep this on the news until the election people!