Reform, and the death of the Tory Party

[Pblakeney]

new or news

New. If asked I’d have presumed she jumped ship last year.

 

[craigwend]

Wokeists leftist Mirror...

 

[Pblakeney]

Here is a simple philosophy. If there are loopholes to be abused then they will be.
No point in point scoring, just close the loopholes.

 

[BoldonLad]

Here is a simple philosophy. If there are loopholes to be abused then they will be.
No point in point scoring, just close the loopholes.

Far too sensible.

 

[briantrumpet]

Here is a simple philosophy. If there are loopholes to be abused then they will be.
No point in point scoring, just close the loopholes.

The loopholes give people careers exploiting them.

 

[CXRAndy]

They are not loopholes, they are current tax legislation.

By being smart you can maximise lowering tax liability

Given the utter shite government we currentlyhave, why would anyone want to pay more tax than they would need to?

Labour are pissing our money up the wall

 

[Pross]

So he’s going to stop the boats within 2 weeks of Reform getting into power but won’t say how. He obviously borrowed Trump’s playbook on one of his many ar$e licking visits. Maybe he intends ordering the navy to open fire on them. Hopefully by the time of the next GE people will have seen from Trump what you get with these populists who tell you how easy it is to solve the big issues.

 

[Stevo 666]

The loopholes give people careers exploiting them.

A very simplistic view.

 

[Stevo 666]

They are not loopholes, they are current tax legislation.

By being smart you can maximise lowering tax liability

Given the utter shite government we currentlyhave, why would anyone want to pay more tax than they would need to?

Labour are pissing our money up the wall

The most common problem here is the failure to distinguish between legitimate arranging of your affairs so that you don't need to pay more tax than you have to - and evasion, errors etc.

 

[Pross]

The most common problem here is the failure to distinguish between legitimate arranging of your affairs so that you don't need to pay more tax than you have to - and evasion, errors etc.

That’s how it should be but even if Rayner had been found to have acted lawfully there would still have been people baying for her blood, and I suspect you would have been one, on the grounds of hypocrisy. To be honest, I have some sympathy for that view as if you are going to go on about the wealthy paying their share and criticising tax avoidance by the wealthy you need to not take that route yourself. Whether she likes it or not and wherever she has risen from she is relatively wealthy now herself.

 

[Stevo 666]

That’s how it should be but even if Rayner had been found to have acted lawfully there would still have been people baying for her blood, and I suspect you would have been one, on the grounds of hypocrisy. To be honest, I have some sympathy for that view as if you are going to go on about the wealthy paying their share and criticising tax avoidance by the wealthy you need to not take that route yourself. Whether she likes it or not and wherever she has risen from she is relatively wealthy now herself.

I'm talking generally here.

In Rayners case its yet to be seen how this pans out with HMRC - likely she will get a penalty for 'careless' behaviour. However what did for her was the breach of the ministerial code.

As for Rayner being wealthy, that might soon be applicable in the past tense:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-may-have-to-sell-hove-flat-after-losing-job/

Quote in case paywalled: admittedly there is some speculation but this does seem to stack up quite well.
"Angela Rayner could struggle to afford the mortgage on her £800,000 holiday home after having her salary heavily reduced, following her resignation from government office.
Ms Rayner also faces a hefty tax bill and possible “carelessness” penalty of more than £50,000 for failing to pay the correct stamp duty on the purchase of a flat that sparked her downfall.
In a further blow, Tories demanded she be stripped of her £16,876 severance payment owing to loss of office because in opposition she had voted to stop ministers under investigation getting a pay-off.

“If she has any integrity then surely she must decline any severance payment,” said Kevin Hollinrake, the Tory party chairman.
Ms Rayner’s salary will be cut from £161,409 to £93,904 – a drop of £67,505 – giving her little margin for error in making her monthly mortgage repayments.
Earlier this week, she admitted she had used her life savings to put a deposit down on the flat. She sold her 25 per cent stake in the family home in Ashton-under-Lyne in Great Manchester for £162,500 and used that to put down a £150,000 deposit on the Hove property.

Angela Rayner may struggle to keep up with payments following the loss of her well-remunerated job
Official documents show she has a £650,000 mortgage on the seaside flat through NatWest.
The scale of the loan will have left her with mortgage repayments as high as £4,000 a month while her salary against an income of £5,400 a month after tax. As deputy prime minister she was taking home £8,100.
Following her resignation, she will have just £1,400 a month left over with two teenage children to look after, covering food and clothing bills, gas and electricity, holidays and sundry other costs.

She also has a £40,000 tax bill to pay as well as a likely penalty of £12,000 plus interest on top of about £1,000 – a total bill of £53,000.
HMRC will have to decide if she should pay the excess for ‘carelessness’ in punishment for originally paying just £30,000 in stamp duty rather than £70,000 on the Hove flat."

 

[First Aspect]

She just about avoided the temptation to give feeble excuses and I suspect she's acted in such a way that she will reappear at the top level again in a year or two.

I don't think Starmer covered himself in glory by equivocating on whether he would sack her if she had been found in breach of the ministerial code. He clearly had some get out of doing so scenario in his mind, but that really undermined his position from the campaign trail last year.

 

[Psamathe]

So he’s going to stop the boats within 2 weeks of Reform getting into power but won’t say how. He obviously borrowed Trump’s playbook on one of his many ar$e licking visits. Maybe he intends ordering the navy to open fire on them. Hopefully by the time of the next GE people will have seen from Trump what you get with these populists who tell you how easy it is to solve the big issues.

Others from Reform have talked about turning the boats back mid-channel which just highlights their lack of any sort of knowledge on practicality of stopping boats. I used to do offshore racing (38 foot sailing) and one race on south coast Customs rib tried to stop us to "inspect" but we were racing and told them so and ignored them (I was not going to allow them to destroy our race without any basis beyond "random") and they couldn't stop us. So an overloaded unstable rib that won't stop and you'll be sinking the thing 1st try at turning it round at which point you'll be drowning families, children, etc. French police used to go into water to stop then back in 2023, but one instance they slashed a boat which deflated one compartment but boat set out anyway (very determined) so much more dangerous - so sensibly they stopped going into water.

 

[BoldonLad]

I'm talking generally here.

In Rayners case its yet to be seen how this pans out with HMRC - likely she will get a penalty for 'careless' behaviour. However what did for her was the breach of the ministerial code.

As for Rayner being wealthy, that might soon be applicable in the past tense:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-may-have-to-sell-hove-flat-after-losing-job/

Quote in case paywalled: admittedly there is some speculation but this does seem to stack up quite well.
"Angela Rayner could struggle to afford the mortgage on her £800,000 holiday home after having her salary heavily reduced, following her resignation from government office.
Ms Rayner also faces a hefty tax bill and possible “carelessness” penalty of more than £50,000 for failing to pay the correct stamp duty on the purchase of a flat that sparked her downfall.
In a further blow, Tories demanded she be stripped of her £16,876 severance payment owing to loss of office because in opposition she had voted to stop ministers under investigation getting a pay-off.

“If she has any integrity then surely she must decline any severance payment,” said Kevin Hollinrake, the Tory party chairman.
Ms Rayner’s salary will be cut from £161,409 to £93,904 – a drop of £67,505 – giving her little margin for error in making her monthly mortgage repayments.
Earlier this week, she admitted she had used her life savings to put a deposit down on the flat. She sold her 25 per cent stake in the family home in Ashton-under-Lyne in Great Manchester for £162,500 and used that to put down a £150,000 deposit on the Hove property.

Angela Rayner may struggle to keep up with payments following the loss of her well-remunerated job
Official documents show she has a £650,000 mortgage on the seaside flat through NatWest.
The scale of the loan will have left her with mortgage repayments as high as £4,000 a month while her salary against an income of £5,400 a month after tax. As deputy prime minister she was taking home £8,100.
Following her resignation, she will have just £1,400 a month left over with two teenage children to look after, covering food and clothing bills, gas and electricity, holidays and sundry other costs.

She also has a £40,000 tax bill to pay as well as a likely penalty of £12,000 plus interest on top of about £1,000 – a total bill of £53,000.
HMRC will have to decide if she should pay the excess for ‘carelessness’ in punishment for originally paying just £30,000 in stamp duty rather than £70,000 on the Hove flat."

I am sure additional income can be earned, speaking roles, lobbyists etc, plus, will she (or the children) not have some maintenance payments from the father(s), or, were they both immaculate conceptions?

 

[Psamathe]

In Rayners case its yet to be seen how this pans out with HMRC - likely she will get a penalty for 'careless' behaviour. However what did for her was the breach of the ministerial code.

From what I've seen she also didn't take proper advice. She had stuff in writing but it wasn't proper/expert advice. Identified in Magnus's letter

1. in those two instances, that advice was qualified by the acknowledgement that it did not constitute expert tax advice and was accompanied by a suggestion, or in one case a recommendation, that specific tax advice be obtained