Angela Rayner to face investigation?
Discussion
Hammersia said:
President Merkin said:
turbobloke said:
Loons = ad hom logical fallacy. Null Points.
It's not beyond parody at all. From the image used, if Rayner owes HMRC tax, it's tax due that's been evaded. Also from the image, Lord Ashcroft has avoided tax, so no tax due.
Evasion is unlawful, avoidance is lawful as per the current £12570 annual tax-free allowance many millions accept and use.
Not knowing the difference between evasion and avoidance isn't beyond parody, it's often a partisan tactic.
The logical fail is assuming Rayner acted knowingly. And if you wish to get onto questions of character, Ashcroft's lawn isn't where I'd park my tanks.It's not beyond parody at all. From the image used, if Rayner owes HMRC tax, it's tax due that's been evaded. Also from the image, Lord Ashcroft has avoided tax, so no tax due.
Evasion is unlawful, avoidance is lawful as per the current £12570 annual tax-free allowance many millions accept and use.
Not knowing the difference between evasion and avoidance isn't beyond parody, it's often a partisan tactic.
Thank God we will shortly have such a real world politician in charge of a major department of state.
Hammersia said:
Ah yes, she was working in a care home, not good with numbers, didn't know what accountants did etc .etc.
Thank God we will shortly have such a real world politician in charge of a major department of state.
You are of course free to speculate. But don't lose sight of the fact that is all you are doing. Luckily for us though should Ange get her hands on the levers of power, she'll have the entire machinery of government behind her. Unlike, say your average care home worker.Thank God we will shortly have such a real world politician in charge of a major department of state.
Hammersia said:
Ah yes, she was working in a care home, not good with numbers, didn't know what accountants did etc .etc.
Thank God we will shortly have such a real world politician in charge of a major department of state.
What department of state would that be? She DL, I don’t see that changing but do you know something the rest of us don’t? Given we’ve seen intellectual giants like Gavin Williamson, multi identity Shapps, Truss and Patel across major departments I don’t think Angela or any of them have much to worry about. Thank God we will shortly have such a real world politician in charge of a major department of state.
Blue62 said:
Hammersia said:
Ah yes, she was working in a care home, not good with numbers, didn't know what accountants did etc .etc.
Thank God we will shortly have such a real world politician in charge of a major department of state.
What department of state would that be? She DL, I don’t see that changing but do you know something the rest of us don’t? Given we’ve seen intellectual giants like Gavin Williamson, multi identity Shapps, Truss and Patel across major departments I don’t think Angela or any of them have much to worry about. Thank God we will shortly have such a real world politician in charge of a major department of state.
Hammersia said:
Or maybe the voters should demand higher standards all round (I've never voted Tory).
I think we would all agree with that sentiment. Perhaps I'm rememebering previous generation of politicians through rose tinted glasses but they did seem to have a greater degree of propriety in the main, or maybe wrong doing is more publicised now. There is a lot to be said for a much more robust code of conduct be set up with external policing and sanction.
Hammersia said:
Or maybe the voters should demand higher standards all round (I've never voted Tory).
I have, won’t be making that mistake again. Couldn’t agree with you more, I’d love to see an end to the two party system and a change to our voting system, we have bad governments that don’t serve our interests and a bad electoral system that means most votes don’t count. I’ve no idea how, under the current system, we can demand higher standards but I’m all ears. However, if you think this speculative story about Rayner’s tax affairs is in any way comparable to some of the absolute corruption we have witnessed over the last few years then there’s no hope.
Blue62 said:
I have, won’t be making that mistake again. Couldn’t agree with you more, I’d love to see an end to the two party system and a change to our voting system, we have bad governments that don’t serve our interests and a bad electoral system that means most votes don’t count. I’ve no idea how, under the current system, we can demand higher standards but I’m all ears.
However, if you think this speculative story about Rayner’s tax affairs is in any way comparable to some of the absolute corruption we have witnessed over the last few years then there’s no hope.
Rayner has been outed as a bit of a hippocrite.However, if you think this speculative story about Rayner’s tax affairs is in any way comparable to some of the absolute corruption we have witnessed over the last few years then there’s no hope.
Blue62 said:
What department of state would that be? She DL, I don’t see that changing but do you know something the rest of us don’t? Given we’ve seen intellectual giants like Gavin Williamson, multi identity Shapps, Truss and Patel across major departments I don’t think Angela or any of them have much to worry about.
Gavin Williamson! Has there ever been more of a useless thicko politician in Cabinet? Chris Grayling perhaps??Blue62 said:
Hammersia said:
Or maybe the voters should demand higher standards all round (I've never voted Tory).
I have, won’t be making that mistake again. Couldn’t agree with you more, I’d love to see an end to the two party system and a change to our voting system, we have bad governments that don’t serve our interests and a bad electoral system that means most votes don’t count. I’ve no idea how, under the current system, we can demand higher standards but I’m all ears. However, if you think this speculative story about Rayner’s tax affairs is in any way comparable to some of the absolute corruption we have witnessed over the last few years then there’s no hope.
Blackrock MD on a million quid salary loses job over fare dodging:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/dec/15/c...
And another city high flyer lost a tribunal for falsely expensing a bolognaise that was for his partner:
https://www.itv.com/news/2023-10-16/bank-was-right...
Relevant to the scale issue:
Judge Illing said, "I have found that this case is not about the sums of money involved.
"This case is about the filing of the expense claim and the conduct of the claimant thereafter.
"It is significant that the claimant did not make a full and frank disclosure at the first opportunity and that he did not answer questions directly."
Hammersia said:
But I suggest it is the basic tests of honesty and probity - of Raynor, of Boris, or Ashcroft etc. that function REGARDLESS of scale, if you'll steal a pound you're more likely to steal a million. Because it's in your nature. It's what you are.
Blackrock MD on a million quid salary loses job over fare dodging:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/dec/15/c...
And another city high flyer lost a tribunal for falsely expensing a bolognaise that was for his partner:
https://www.itv.com/news/2023-10-16/bank-was-right...
Relevant to the scale issue:
Judge Illing said, "I have found that this case is not about the sums of money involved.
"This case is about the filing of the expense claim and the conduct of the claimant thereafter.
"It is significant that the claimant did not make a full and frank disclosure at the first opportunity and that he did not answer questions directly."
But the underlying point at this stage is that it’s purely speculative as to whether she owes tax, it’s a story, pushed and promoted by a non dom Tory peer. If she’s found to have evaded tax then fine, but up to that point it’s just faux indignation on the part of people who hate her for what she is. Blackrock MD on a million quid salary loses job over fare dodging:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/dec/15/c...
And another city high flyer lost a tribunal for falsely expensing a bolognaise that was for his partner:
https://www.itv.com/news/2023-10-16/bank-was-right...
Relevant to the scale issue:
Judge Illing said, "I have found that this case is not about the sums of money involved.
"This case is about the filing of the expense claim and the conduct of the claimant thereafter.
"It is significant that the claimant did not make a full and frank disclosure at the first opportunity and that he did not answer questions directly."
I also disagree with your point about equivalence, if I evaded tax to the tune of £3000 or £300k the consequences would and should be rather different.
Well from this mornings interview she was quite clearly stating that her principle private residence was the house she owned.
quite clever wording really because the intimation is the ex-council house but as far as i heard she never actually states which address, but she does mentioned spending time at her husbands house.
The question that was never asked or answered is was that the same PPR as her husband.
Some clarity and transparency is all that is required her, the more it seems to be obfuscating and diverting (smear campaign etc) the less savory it seems.
quite clever wording really because the intimation is the ex-council house but as far as i heard she never actually states which address, but she does mentioned spending time at her husbands house.
The question that was never asked or answered is was that the same PPR as her husband.
Some clarity and transparency is all that is required her, the more it seems to be obfuscating and diverting (smear campaign etc) the less savory it seems.
S600BSB said:
Gavin Williamson! Has there ever been more of a useless thicko politician in Cabinet? Chris Grayling perhaps??
Sir Gavin! Knighted after posting a photograph of himself sitting at his desk with a little black book and a whip in front of him. Boris got the message and Gav got his knighthood. Maybe it was recognition of him leaking documents when he was Defence Minister, or could it have been the multiple U turns (Starmer haters deplore them y’know) on A levels and school closures during Covid. Maybe it was telling the press he’d zoomed with Marcus Rashford over free school meals, when it turned out to be another black sportsman, Mario Itoje, or telling Russia to ‘go away and shut up’ after the Salisbury poisonings.
Arise dame Angela, for you may or may not have evaded a small sum in CGT, if you did it may have been deliberate though it’s possible that you didn’t fully understand the rules. The fact that professional advisers have reviewed your situation, added to which HMRC have so far shown no interest, should not deter Lord Ashcroft and the right wing press, along with a few window lickers elsewhere from making as much capital as possible over this (so far) non story in an effort to smear you.
President Merkin said:
turbobloke said:
Loons = ad hom logical fallacy. Null Points.
It's not beyond parody at all. From the image used, if Rayner owes HMRC tax, it's tax due that's been evaded. Also from the image, Lord Ashcroft has avoided tax, so no tax due.
Evasion is unlawful, avoidance is lawful as per the current £12570 annual tax-free allowance many millions accept and use.
Not knowing the difference between evasion and avoidance isn't beyond parody, it's often a partisan tactic.
The logical fail is assuming Rayner acted knowingly. And if you wish to get onto questions of character, Ashcroft's lawn isn't where I'd park my tanks.It's not beyond parody at all. From the image used, if Rayner owes HMRC tax, it's tax due that's been evaded. Also from the image, Lord Ashcroft has avoided tax, so no tax due.
Evasion is unlawful, avoidance is lawful as per the current £12570 annual tax-free allowance many millions accept and use.
Not knowing the difference between evasion and avoidance isn't beyond parody, it's often a partisan tactic.
Quite clearly she will now know what the rules were & so its now about the obvious deflection, obfuscation and failure to give a straight answer to simple questions she's been engaged in for the last 6 weeks.
If she had "awkward" living arrangements through necessity she could have made huge (political) capital out of this. Instead of which she's flapped around and failed to shut it down. Recent examples suggest that when politicians do that they invariably have something to hide.
Deesee said:
lol Gove has come out in support..
Not exactly.
"Levelling up Secretary Michael Gove said while he was personally sure Ms Rayner "has done nothing wrong", there was a "big question over what happened with Angela Rayner's homes".
"The only way that Angela Rayner can resolve ongoing questions is to publish her legal advice and tax details and put an end to the speculation," he said.
"Unless and until she does she will be dogged by this speculation and questions.
"It's in her interest, Labour's interests and country's interest that she levels and answers the really serious questions that have been put to her."
Wombat3 said:
Not exactly.
"Levelling up Secretary Michael Gove said while he was personally sure Ms Rayner "has done nothing wrong", there was a "big question over what happened with Angela Rayner's homes".
"The only way that Angela Rayner can resolve ongoing questions is to publish her legal advice and tax details and put an end to the speculation," he said.
"Unless and until she does she will be dogged by this speculation and questions.
"It's in her interest, Labour's interests and country's interest that she levels and answers the really serious questions that have been put to her."
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff