The Labour Government

Brewster's millions said:
Cuts both ways though.

A ‘normal’ person wouldn’t have spent the last few years advancing their career and elevating themselves into a position of huge authority by rampaging against people avoiding tax and owning second homes.

So when it turns out that such a person has avoided tax on a matter relating to a second (or third) home, then they shouldn’t expect to treated as a normal person.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, I’ve already said she should resign for it. To be clear, it’s a second home and only in stamp duty world, not in reality.

I’m not convinced it was as intentional as others though, given if she’d have waited a few months then what she did would have been perfectly fine. Seen she’s now said she sought advice from three separate parties too.
 
meltonblue said:
Well, yes, I’ve already said she should resign for it. To be clear, it’s a second home and only in stamp duty world, not in reality.

I’m not convinced it was as intentional as others though, given if she’d have waited a few months then what she did would have been perfectly fine. Seen she’s now said she sought advice from three separate parties too.
Click to expand...
Strange that she didn’t seek advice from Shoosmiths though, given that they established the trust for her son and could have very easily explained the implications of that with regard to stamp duty.

Particularly given that she sold her share of the family home (at a valuation exactly on the IHT threshold) to that trust, which appears to have been the source of the funds for the property in Hove.

Plus the fact that she’s classed as a politically exposed person, and therefore would have faced a higher level of scrutiny around the origin of the funds for purchase of the Hove property.

So lots of opportunities it seems for her to have been given the correct legal advice, or at least for the potential complications around the trust from a stamp duty perspective to have been raised. Yet strangely none of that occurred, and despite these failings, she’s not willing to disclose who provided what appears to have been very poor professional advice.
 
meltonblue said:
Well, yes, I’ve already said she should resign for it. To be clear, it’s a second home and only in stamp duty world, not in reality.

I’m not convinced it was as intentional as others though, given if she’d have waited a few months then what she did would have been perfectly fine. Seen she’s now said she sought advice from three separate parties too.
Click to expand...
It seems uncontroversial though that she's jumped through hoops to avoid paying tax.

Why did she put her house up north into trust before buying the one in the south and not afterwards? Because she thought doing so would save her £40k.

Why did she value the house up north at £650k and not e.g. £700k? Because it avoids her having to pay IHT.

Why did she describe the house up north as being her primary residence (whilst pretending to the HMRC that it isn't)? Because then the government picks up the council tax bill on her flat in London - a much higher sum that if they paid it in Ashton.

Why did she say she lived in her council flat when buying it, whilst actually living with her partner at a different address and registering that other address as the home of her children? So she could get 25% off the purchase price of her council flat.

Why did she not come clean about all of these details? Because she knew full well everything she was doing would be pounded upon if public.The idea that she needed a court order to keep her children's details out of the media is ludicrous. People rightly wanted to know the financial details not the names or other details about her kids

It's transparently obvious that she's consistently arranged her finances to reduce her tax and maximise her benefits, whilst simultaneously slagging off all and sundry in the Tory party for doing the same thing.
 
Brewster's millions said:
Strange that she didn’t seek advice from Shoosmiths though, given that they established the trust for her son and could have very easily explained the implications of that with regard to stamp duty.

Particularly given that she sold her share of the family home (at a valuation exactly on the IHT threshold) to that trust, which appears to have been the source of the funds for the property in Hove.

Plus the fact that she’s classed as a politically exposed person, and therefore would have faced a higher level of scrutiny around the origin of the funds for purchase of the Hove property.

So lots of opportunities it seems for her to have been given the correct legal advice, or at least for the potential complications around the trust from a stamp duty perspective to have been raised. Yet strangely none of that occurred, and despite these failings, she’s not willing to disclose who provided what appears to have been very poor professional advice.
Click to expand...

She’s clearly going to have to do that now though, so let’s wait and see what the output of what that is. To reiterate again, I’ve already said that regardless, I personally see it as a resigning matter already and she should have done that today.
 
I think her position probably is untenable now, given her role. It’s a shame in a way, because she is one of the few authentic working class voices in the government but her previous vocal criticisms of Tory ministers leaves her wide open to accusations of hypocrisy. Not sure what she’s done is quite on a similar scale to others, but it’s felt like she’s been targeted by sections of the right-wing press for a while, so to fuck up like this is either very naive or stupid on her behalf.
 
Chippy_boy said:
It seems uncontroversial though that she's jumped through hoops to avoid paying tax.

Why did she put her house up north into trust before buying the one in the south and not afterwards? Because she thought doing so would save her £40k.

Why did she value the house up north at £650k and not e.g. £700k? Because it avoids her having to pay IHT.

Why did she describe the house up north as being her primary residence (whilst pretending to the HMRC that it isn't)? Because then the government picks up the council tax bill on her flat in London - a much higher sum that if they paid it in Ashton.

Why did she say she lived in her council flat when buying it, whilst actually living with her partner at a different address and registering that other address as the home of her children? So she could get 25% off the purchase price of her council flat.

Why did she not come clean about all of these details? Because she knew full well everything she was doing would be pounded upon if public.The idea that she needed a court order to keep her children's details out of the media is ludicrous. People rightly wanted to know the financial details not the names or other details about her kids

It's transparently obvious that she's consistently arranged her finances to reduce her tax and maximise her benefits, whilst simultaneously slagging off all and sundry in the Tory party for doing the same thing.
Click to expand...

I’ve already said repeatedly that I think she should resign but there’s a lot of assumptions there that you’re taking as fact. I can completely see the logic in selling her portion of the house to the trust for both herself and her son. To think she’d do it directly to save on the stamp duty is nonsensical unless she actually has been given bad advice.
 
Ric said:
I think her position probably is untenable now, given her role. It’s a shame in a way, because she is one of the few authentic working class voices in the government but her previous vocal criticisms of Tory ministers leaves her wide open to accusations of hypocrisy. Not sure what she’s done is quite on a similar scale to others, but it’s felt like she’s been targeted by sections of the right-wing press for a while, so to fuck up like this is either very naive or stupid on her behalf.
Click to expand...

I do find it frustrating that for some that are overly party political, they’re calling for her resignation for doing far far less than others have done.

The truth should be that politicians of any persuasion have to be held to the highest standards and should all be treated similar. Hers for me is a resigning matter, as it should have been for all of them that don’t meet the standards of public life.
 
meltonblue said:
To think she’d do it directly to save on the stamp duty is nonsensical unless she actually has been given bad advice.
Click to expand...
Why?

The thought process is hardly difficult or convoluted:

"Hmmm. If I buy this flat in Brighton, I'm looking at £70k in stamp duty. But if I leave the Ashton house to the kids in trust, then I get to still live there when up north and I get to save £40k because I won't have to pay the 2nd home premium. No brainer.

And wait a moment.. if I say it's worth £650k I won't have to pay IHT either. RESULT!"

"But hang on a minute... If the press get hold of this, I'll get slaughtered. So why don't I get a court order to stop the details being revealed. Perfect."
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
That’s a thought, why is Farage answering questions from Americans?
Click to expand...
Gym Jordan inviting him to tell the US the UK is worse than North Korea and they should put bigger tariffs on us to protect free speech.

In other words being a treasonous ****.

Back on Topic:

There's some serious gnashing of teeth in thread currently.
 
TinFoilHat said:
Gym Jordan inviting him to tell the US the UK is worse than North Korea and they should put bigger tariffs on us to protect free speech.

In other words being a treasonous ****.

Back on Topic:

There's some serious gnashing of teeth in thread currently.
Click to expand...
So, political grandstanding to further run our country down.

I can’t watch this ****, even if he’s being put in his place.

Wanker!
 
Chippy_boy said:
Why?

The thought process is hardly difficult or convoluted:

"Hmmm. If I buy this flat in Brighton, I'm looking at £70k in stamp duty. But if I leave the Ashton house to the kids in trust, then I get to still live there when up north and I get to save £40k because I won't have to pay the 2nd home premium. No brainer.

And wait a moment.. if I say it's worth £650k I won't have to pay IHT either. RESULT!"

"But hang on a minute... If the press get hold of this, I'll get slaughtered. So why don't I get a court order to stop the details being revealed. Perfect."
Click to expand...

No, that’s a stupid thought process which is why I said she’s either been badly advised or an idiot as that would only be true if she’d waited only a few months more.

The greater likelihood is she needed the money from the Ashton house to put down to then get a mortgage on the Brighton house. That would suit both her and her son’s trust.

Her not paying the right amount of stamp duty, had she waited three months then she’d have paid the right amount, so why didn’t she just wait?
 
meltonblue said:
I do find it frustrating that for some that are overly party political, they’re calling for her resignation for doing far far less than others have done.

The truth should be that politicians of any persuasion have to be held to the highest standards and should all be treated similar. Hers for me is a resigning matter, as it should have been for all of them that don’t meet the standards of public life.
Click to expand...

This ends up being the issue, generally, 'decent' people who know they fucked up accidentally or intentionally step aside, the worst hang in there. The period following Boris Johnson in the past would have led to an immediate general election but the worst stick around to see what other financial benefit they can get.

I do think for the image of the government she'll have to step aside. It does seem like she was ill advised regarding the property and what rights she had with her disabled son. Still, not an excuse most of us would get away with, so the same standards should apply.

Genuinely frustrating that we're sleepwalking into the most right wing government in modern history and they'll do things that make this look like child's play.
 
MCFC1993 said:
This ends up being the issue, generally 'decent' people who know they fucked up accidentally or intentionally step aside, the worst hang in there. The period following Boris Johnson in the past would have led to an immediate general election but the worst stick around to see what other financial benefit they can get.

I do think for the image of the government she'll have to step aside. It does seem like she was ill advised regarding the property and what rights she had with her disabled son. Still, not an excuse most of us would get away with, so the same standards should apply.

Genuinely frustrating that we're sleepwalking into the most right wing government in modern history and they'll do things that make this looks like child's play.
Click to expand...

It’s what has most frustrated me too. I’m not a labour voter but really wanted them to succeed as the potential alternative I still struggle to contemplate. The amount of self inflicted errors they’ve made despite knowing coming in how fragile the whole situation is though has made me so disappointed. They must have surely known the scrutiny they’d come under from day one.

On your second paragraph, it’s worth reiterating she won’t be treated any differently to anyone else by HMRC aside from the fact that she’s in public life means she’ll be rightly more penalised as she’s likely to lose her job.
 
I'd like to think Ange has done nothing wrong but, and it's not just her but every time this sort of thing comes up, no matter which party they belong to it's never ever that the mistake is too much has been paid always that they've been on the money making/saving/sleazy side .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top