7 months ago | 15 comments
Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister and housing secretary, has confessed to underpaying stamp duty on a Hove flat purchase, saying her mistake was down to flawed tax guidance.
She has voluntarily referred herself to the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards to address the issue.
In an emotional interview on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunction podcast with Beth Rigby, Ms Rayner revealed she was devastated by the oversight of relying on legal advice that she owed only the standard stamp duty rate.
Ms Rayner says she has discussed with her family the possibility of resigning to shield her son, who has lifelong disabilities, from public scrutiny.
She said: “I’ve been in shock, really, because I thought I’d done everything properly, and I relied on the advice that I received, and I’m devastated because I’ve always upheld the rules and always have felt proud to do that.”
The controversy stems from a Daily Telegraph report alleging Ms Rayner avoided £40,000 in stamp duty by removing her name from a Greater Manchester property’s deeds.
She clarified that her first home was transferred to a trust after her 2023 divorce to secure stability for her son, the trust’s sole beneficiary due to his disabilities.
Initially, legal advice indicated the standard stamp duty rate applied to her Hove purchase, but recent media scrutiny prompted her to seek further expert opinion, revealing additional tax liabilities due to the trust’s complex provisions.
Ms Rayner explained that confidentiality clauses were in place to protect her son, but she sought a court order yesterday to lift these in the interest of transparency.
She said: “The reason why those confidential clauses were in place was to protect my son, who, through no fault of his own, he’s vulnerable, he’s got this life-changing, lifelong conditions and I don’t want him or anything to do with his day-to-day life, to be subjected to that level of scrutiny.”
The issue surfaced just before the first Prime Minister’s Questions after the summer break.
That’s when Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called for Ms Rayner’s sacking, saying: “If he had backbone, he would sack her.”
However, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer defended his deputy, saying: “She’s gone over and above in setting out the details, including yesterday afternoon asking a court to lift a confidentiality order in relation to her own son.”
He went on to highlight her efforts to build 1.5 million homes and advance workers’ rights.
Ms Rayner said that post-divorce, she and her ex-husband arranged for their children to stay in their Ashton-under-Lyne family home, alternating their own presence.
The home, adapted for her son’s needs, was sold to a trust established in 2020 following a distressing incident that left him disabled.
The trust ensures her son’s security, Ms Rayner said, adding that she owned no other property when purchasing the Hove flat.
She is now working with HMRC to resolve the outstanding amount.
Ms Rayner said: “I deeply regret the error that has been made.
“I am committed to resolving this matter fully and providing the transparency that public service demands.”
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
7 months ago | 15 comments
8 months ago | 14 comments
9 months ago | 44 comments
Sorry. You must be logged in to view this form.
Member Since August 2015 - Comments: 26
12:34 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Suspicious Steve at 04/09/2025 – 07:44
The numbers are wrong that’s why. We have no idea of her sources of income. Today for example it has been revealed that David Chinny donated funds to her as well as making payments to Rachel Reeves, Wes Streeting, Bridget Phillipson, Lisa Nandy and David Lammy. (source Declassified UK)
Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 24
12:46 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Resign now Rayner
Member Since October 2019 - Comments: 391
12:53 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Jan at 04/09/2025 – 12:10
Yes, tax is very confusing. The HMRC site states, if a gain is made when selling a property, earnings should be added and the whole lot is taxed on a sliding scale from 10% through to 45% depending on what it all adds up to, but elsewhere on their states a gain on property is taxed at 18% alone???
Member Since July 2023 - Comments: 32
2:38 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Reply to the comment left by david porter at 04/09/2025 – 11:44
The HMRC unforgiving in the realms of tax discrepancies for any John Doe out there. Why should this be any different 🤷♂️
Member Since October 2019 - Comments: 391
2:52 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
She has a lot to do with renters rights bill which is as clear as mud in parts. Eg the £7000 fines. Are they for each thing they find needs sorting or for any thing that hasn’t been sorted within the timeframe they allow?
Member Since August 2021 - Comments: 307 - Articles: 1
3:49 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Jan at 04/09/2025 – 12:10
Jan I wish you all the best sorting out your situation.
The only thing which is clear from this it that it is yet another example of how this poorly thought through of the popularist attack on landlords by George Osborne, which Rachel Reeves (unwisely) chose to double down on – well 60% – increasing it to 5% in her last budged (pun intended).
This is not a property tax, it is a TAX On HOUSING, as it only applies to residential property.
No doubt the clumsy drafting brought in trusts to rake in money on transfers for estate planning, but situations such as yours must be relatively common.
The SDLT surcharge was brought in when the BTL market had grown due to fiscal and regulatory incompetence, producing historic low borrowing costs.
Where is the acknowledgement that the growth of the PRS mitigated the under provision of new supply in the social sector?
This tax penalises landlords renewing leases where the premium exceeds £40K – taxed to maintain the value of a wasting asset.
It also creates a barrier for landlords (large and small) to add to their portfolio, or even buy a replacement asset, by requiring an additional 5% cash up front.
No wonder landlords are not rushing to purchase new homes from developers or pre-loved rentals from those selling up, despite the current dip in property prices.
Last time I checked, the revenue generated by this tax is less than £1bn and has been falling for a number of years.
Time for this tax to go.
IHowz will be making their case for abolition of the SDLT surcharge as part of their submission for the budget which is on Wed 26 November.
Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 341
5:02 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
“May 2025: Using the proceeds from the sale of her share in the Ashton property, Ms Rayner purchased a home in Hove.”
How did that work? Where did the money come from to enable the trust to pay her for her share?
Was their stamp duty on the transfer of share into the trust?
Did she pay CGT on the share transferred?
If not, under what provisions was it exempt from CGT and Stamp Duty?
Did she live in the property throughout? If not, how did she manage to claim full CGT exemption?
How much was her share in the Ashton property worth? It apparently enabled her to buy an £800k flat!
Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 341
5:08 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Jack Craven at 04/09/2025 – 12:33You need to have a word with your accountant.
HMRC had your money, it was just in the wrong bucket. Therefore, HMRC would almost certainly accept that you had a reasonable excuse. Brain fart would probably be accepted.
I would apply for the penalties to be waived. You’ve nothing to lose and everything to gain:-)
Member Since August 2021 - Comments: 307 - Articles: 1
5:18 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Ryan Stevens at 04/09/2025 – 17:08
CGT paid to wrong HMRC account – I managed this a couple of years ago, and a few months later got their demands.
I made exactly this argument – I have paid, you have my money, so no charges or interest should apply, it’s simply on a suspense account earning interest.
Once I provided supporting evidence they took their own sweet time, but after a couple of months I received a statement confirming the balance had been reallocated, so nothing now due.
Member Since July 2023 - Comments: 32
6:19 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Ryan Stevens at 04/09/2025 – 17:02
No point in detail picking. She will be vindicated probably coming through stronger. Hey ho funny old world we live in …..