Deputy PM Angela Rayner admits to underpaying stamp duty on flat

Deputy PM Angela Rayner admits to underpaying stamp duty on flat

Angela Rayner, deputy PM, interviewed on Sky News about not paying stamp duty
11:08 AM, 4th September 2025, 7 months ago 39
Categories:

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.

‘I relied on advice’

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.

Call to sack Rayner

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.”

Building 1.5 million homes

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.”

Angela Rayner’s timeline of events

  • 2020: Following an incident that resulted in lifelong disabilities for Rayner’s young son, a trust was established for him. The family home was adapted to accommodate his needs, and Ms Rayner and her ex-husband agreed to transfer their ownership interest in the property to the trust, with their son as the sole beneficiary
  • 2023: A portion of the ownership interest in the family home was transferred to the trust. After their divorce, Ms Rayner and her ex-husband arranged a ‘nesting’ setup, allowing their children to remain in the Ashton-under-Lyne family home while the parents took turns living there. Rayner considers this property her family home, as it is where her children reside, attend school and now college
  • January 2025: Ms Rayner transferred the remaining ownership interest in the Ashton property to her son’s trust, ensuring his long-term security in the home
  • May 2025: Using the proceeds from the sale of her share in the Ashton property, Ms Rayner purchased a home in Hove. She received legal advice indicating she was required to pay the standard rate of stamp duty on the Hove property
  • Since May: Following recent public attention, Ms Rayner sought more advice and discovered she owed additional stamp duty. She notes that a court order previously restricted her from disclosing full details of her financial arrangements, but this order has been lifted. Ms Rayner is now working with lawyers and HMRC to settle any outstanding payments.

Watch Angela Rayner’s Sky News interview:


Share This Article

Comments

  • Member Since August 2014 - Comments: 175

    7:51 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    I do not accept for one moment that Rayner did not calculate she was saving 40k in CGT by making the deliberate decision to fudge her housing situation.
    Rayner’s mis-advice excuse is plainly, in CIA parlance, plausible denial.
    She knew what she was doing and all she says now is just damage control.
    She should resign forthwith.

  • Member Since March 2024 - Comments: 281

    9:36 PM, 4th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Bristol Landlord at 04/09/2025 – 19:51
    The default position is that any property interest held by a child under the age of 18 is treated as the parent having an interest in that property (minors cannot own property in their own name so it has to be in trust).

    This really has nothing to do with the original setting up of the trust which was funded from NHS compensation however complicated that was or wasn’t as far as I can make out. It’s established that Rayner transferred her remaining stake in the constituency home into the trust for £162,500 that was paid out of it to her. The key point is the son, under 18, had a stake in the property and that counts as if the parent had a stake in the property – making any additional purchase liable to additional SDLT premium.

    That means the default really seems to be having to pay the premium – rather than this so called need for multiple advice that supposedly said it was NOT payable.

    (From other discussion sites it is clear that there is a provision for trusts set up for those with disabilities to avoid additional SDLT if a property is being bought for the child’s needs within the trust but a parent already owns a property – but that is nothing to do with the situation here of course).

    The additional SDLT is designed to be payable in most circumstances, somebody having a tiny flat or single BTL then marrying and not selling that property would be liable for SDLT premium on buying a family home to bring up their family. Or using a bridging loan to buy a new home before the old one is sold – pay the premium until you can reclaim it when you’re back down to one. And us as landlords – trying to provide more properties for others to make their homes in – pay the premium rate.

    Rayner snivelling on TV ignores the fact that the premium is supposed to catch every individual (or married couple and their under 18 children) who buys more than one property with very limited exception such as separated couples and buying in trust for the child (as opposed to extracting money from the child’s trust to buy outside it). Osborne introduced it but Labour can’t say they disagree – Reeves just upped it to 5% last October for pity’s sake.

  • Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 97

    10:20 AM, 5th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Ryan Stevens at 04/09/2025 – 17:08
    Thanks for the encouragement Ryan, I have appealed to HMRC I even used the words brain fart, I am still waiting a reply.

  • Member Since May 2015 - Comments: 2188 - Articles: 2

    7:30 AM, 6th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Keith Wellburn at 04/09/2025 – 21:36
    Whilst I do not agree with the SDLT surcharge, except on genuine second homes, I do like to see a government minister caught in the trap which successive governments nave laid for landlords.

  • Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 341

    12:01 PM, 6th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    Angela Rayner had to resign? Shame. couldn’t have happened to a nicer person.

    Maybe she will now have a bit more empathy with landlords, who have to comply with hundreds of regulations and face the possibility, nay likelihood, that financial, and even criminal, sanctions will be imposed if they accidentally trip up.

  • Member Since November 2024 - Comments: 81

    7:26 AM, 10th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Tim at 04/09/2025 – 10:19
    There is alot of money sloshing around in trade union coffers. Trade union members only realise what a waste of money all their years contributions are when they need their help and they dont help. Like some charities Shelter etc some make out they help but make situation worse. Let’s call it a conflict of interest – if they actually solved what they are meant to then they would be out of a cushy job and their overpaid salary.

  • Member Since November 2024 - Comments: 81

    7:36 AM, 10th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Keith Wellburn at 04/09/2025 – 21:36
    Great clarification. In short satisfying to see an MP fall in the traps they lay out for us mere mortals to fall into.

  • Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 1996 - Articles: 21

    10:51 AM, 10th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    There may be even more to this story as barrister, Daniel Shensmith, the “Black Belt Barrister” (who apparently holds a 7th-degree black belt in Taekwondo) discusses here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSXsbjWkcdo concerning the valuation of the property Rayner sold to her son’s trust.

  • Member Since March 2024 - Comments: 281

    11:15 AM, 10th September 2025, About 7 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 10/09/2025 – 10:51
    That she was on the Electoral Register at all three homes got lost in the wider story,

    I tried to get dual registration at both my homes (enables voting in local elections but obviously only once in national ones). Both local councils told me it was not possible unless I divided my time exactly 50 / 50 between properties. I didn’t so I remain on the ER at just my main home.

    Has Angela Rayner confirmed she divides her time exactly in thirds at each property? And if so – does she actually do that?

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

Related Articles