Reform, and the death of the Tory Party

[secretsqirrel]

Small point - HMRC have ruled that is was, and that the flat was her primary residence. She has only been found guilty of breaching the ministerial code. So cleared by Electoral Fraud and by HMRC. Her only "offence" was to not have realised (based on legal advice) that her interest in the original family home which was joint owned by her husband, and which she put her share into via a Trust for her son, might move her new home into the second home bracket even though she only owned one home.



ALso


So it's fine to deliberately legally structure your vast wealth to minimise tax liability if you are Richard Tice of Reform and avoid paying £600m in tax, but beyond the pale for a single woman with one property to do the same and mistakenly avoid £40k in tax based on financial advice.

Dubai Dicky was rather vocal in calling for Rayner to resign.

 

[CXRAndy]

I think it's £600k not millions.

I didn't think it was to do with electoral fraud, she wasnt in a period of voting when she was buying this second property.

 

[icowden]

Dubai Dicky was rather vocal in calling for Rayner to resign.

Obviously he will be the first to follow her example.

 

[BoldonLad]

I very much doubt that Tice dreamt up his own tax reduction mechanism, so, presumably, he "took advice" from people he deemed experts, to reduce his tax bill. It would appear Rayner did similar, ie took advice from people she deemed experts, to reduce her tax bill.

Perhaps BOTH of them should have also taken advice on the PR implications, even if their "dodges" were legal.

 

[C R]

I very much doubt that Tice dreamt up his own tax reduction mechanism, so, presumably, he "took advice" from people he deemed experts, to reduce his tax bill. It would appear Rayner did similar, ie took advice from people she deemed experts, to reduce her tax bill.

Perhaps BOTH of them should have also taken advice on the PR implications, even if their "dodges" were legal.

I don't think what Rayner did can be reasonably described as a dodge.

 

[CXRAndy]

Perhaps BOTH of them should have also taken advice on the PR implications, even if their "dodges" were legal.

If its legal, then it's not dodging.

 

[BoldonLad]

I don't think what Rayner did can be reasonably described as a dodge.

If its legal, then it's not dodging.

I did put "dodge" in quotes, but, OK, we will say avoidance scheme or reduction scheme, the end result is the same, two individuals attempting to reduced the amount paid to HMRC and maximise the amount kept in their bank account.

PS I have broken one of my own golden rules now 😂

 

[C R]

I did put "dodge" in quotes, but, OK, we will say avoidance scheme or reduction scheme, the end result is the same, two individuals attempting to reduced the amount paid to HMRC and maximise the amount kept in their bank account.

PS I have broken one of my own golden rules now 😂

Again, there's no evidence that Rayner was purposefully trying to reduce her tax due.

 

[matticus]

PS I have broken one of my own golden rules now 😂

Hypocrite!

 

[BoldonLad]

Hypocrite!

Not sure you realise which "golden rule" I broke? 😂

 

[briantrumpet]

Not sure you realise which "golden rule" I broke? 😂

I was actually wondering about that. Maybe you are scared of scare quotes... 😜

 

[CXRAndy]

Again, there's no evidence that Rayner was purposefully trying to reduce her tax due.

By not paying what was legally due it is classed as evasion, which is illegal.


Using legislation to reduce your tax liabilities is called avoidance, which is legal.

 

[CXRAndy]

Certainly looks that way


View: https://x.com/i/status/2033667246233461233

 

[Stevo 666]

Stevo, that's complete bollocks and you know it. After a detailed review of the purchase it was found that on balance she probably should have paid the tax, but at the time was advised by people whose job it is to advise about tax that she didn't need to pay the tax as the property was exempt due to being purchased via a Trust for her disabled son.

Again. Bollocks. There is absolutely no doubt that Tice is such a patriot that he has deliberately avoided paying £600m in tax.

Agreed. It just makes him an immoral cünt.

No, not after a detailed review. It was a basic piece of advice that she should have taken, but did not. And then made it worse by falsely claiming that she had done so - a point clearly denied by the law firm who had allegedly advised her.

As for the jury being out in the Tice case, show me where that has been concluded. Or stop talking bollox.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

Rayner didn't pay tax that was clearly due. The jury is out on the Tice case, but if it is a case of legal optimisation of a complex tax position then the optics may be bad but that's not relevant to whether there is any wrong doing. If however he has been evading tax, then he deserves to get the book thrown at him. Let's see.

I don't think Tice has evaded tax, he has used legal means to avoid paying the maximum possible tax. However, you did bang on about Starmer et al accepting gifts and freebies from donors Stevo, and how terrible it was and possibly even grounds for resigning (when they did nothing illegal).

If Tice, as someone who has made his entire political career talking about doing the best for working British people, has actively sought to minimise his potentially very large tax contributions, then I don't see how ethically that makes him any different from those on the left you are readily happy to bash?