Angela Rayner to face investigation?
Discussion
Quote from the Mail (I know...) "Yesterday, GMP Chief Constable Stephen Watson said there were 'a number of assertions knocking about' and his officers were 'going to get to the bottom of what has happened'."
As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
vaud said:
Amateurish said:
Can you find the actual quote? I tried Googling...
If this relates to "Partygate" then I imagine that the standard would be different for a standing PM who broke the rules he himself had introduced.
Vs something which allegedly happened 15 years when AR was a care worker for Stockport council (and 5 years before she stood as an MP).
I appreciate the difference but those that live in glass houses... I'm not political about this, I think all MPs should be held to the same standards.If this relates to "Partygate" then I imagine that the standard would be different for a standing PM who broke the rules he himself had introduced.
Vs something which allegedly happened 15 years when AR was a care worker for Stockport council (and 5 years before she stood as an MP).
There's a category difference between alleged offences committed decades ago before someone becomes an MP and those committed while PM.
heebeegeetee said:
Quote from the Mail (I know...) "Yesterday, GMP Chief Constable Stephen Watson said there were 'a number of assertions knocking about' and his officers were 'going to get to the bottom of what has happened'."
As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
Mone is under investigation https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/26/mi...As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
As are the Post Office https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68691257
The SNP have also been investigated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Branchform
Boris was famously investigated by the police over Covid breaches, less well known is that he was investigated again last year https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/23/b...
Dominic Cummings was also investigated by the police https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/22/d...
Amateurish said:
vaud said:
Amateurish said:
Can you find the actual quote? I tried Googling...
If this relates to "Partygate" then I imagine that the standard would be different for a standing PM who broke the rules he himself had introduced.
Vs something which allegedly happened 15 years when AR was a care worker for Stockport council (and 5 years before she stood as an MP).
I appreciate the difference but those that live in glass houses... I'm not political about this, I think all MPs should be held to the same standards.If this relates to "Partygate" then I imagine that the standard would be different for a standing PM who broke the rules he himself had introduced.
Vs something which allegedly happened 15 years when AR was a care worker for Stockport council (and 5 years before she stood as an MP).
There's a category difference between alleged offences committed decades ago before someone becomes an MP and those committed while PM.
sugerbear said:
MaxFromage said:
rscott said:
The CGT issue has a 6 year limit, unless they can show it was deliberate, rather than a mistake, so unlikely to be able to charge her for that either. Not sure that the police normally investigate tax issues either?
That's not correct. If she failed to notify her liability to CGT, they can go back 20 years:https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/enquiry-m...
If she calculated that she didn't have any CGT liability why would she need to notify?
I'm pretty sure that would apply if you were selling a property which was not your main residence. In the case of property I think the requirement used to be that you had to file the return within 30 days of the sale (I believe its now 60 days).
Mr Penguin said:
Earthdweller said:
No it won’t be
The investigation will be being treated as a critical incident, ie one that has a serious reputational risk to the organisation
It will have been allocated to a very experienced SIO with a dedicated team of specialist detectives
It’s most likely a syndicate from FMIT ( Force Major incident team ) that has been allocated the job as a whole
These are dedicated teams that normally investigate the most serious and complex crimes/enquiries
There won’t be any corners cut at all
What would trigger that level of investigation? Is it because she is a sr politician or just because it is in the news? The investigation will be being treated as a critical incident, ie one that has a serious reputational risk to the organisation
It will have been allocated to a very experienced SIO with a dedicated team of specialist detectives
It’s most likely a syndicate from FMIT ( Force Major incident team ) that has been allocated the job as a whole
These are dedicated teams that normally investigate the most serious and complex crimes/enquiries
There won’t be any corners cut at all
Amateurish said:
Wombat3 said:
IIRC she was an MP when she sold the house & that is when the CGT liability would have arisen, if it did.
WrongThe exact timeline is that she was selected as a candidate in September 2014, Sold her house in March 2015 and was elected in May 2015
So she was not an MP but was a selected candidate and engaged in an election campaign telling people she ought to be their MP when she sold the house in question.
Wombat3 said:
IIRC she was an MP when she sold the house & that is when the CGT liability would have arisen, if it did.
Realistically, if you owned a house, and you started a new relationship with a new partner who also owned their own house, and you paid for the upkeep of services on your original house and you also paid the mortgage. And they paid for the upkeep of services on their house and mortgage on their house. And then at some point you start living together and you start a family. Once the relationship seems stable you decide to sell your house and live in the one house together. Would you realistically expect to pay CGT on the gain of your original house?sugerbear said:
"if" doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
If she calculated that she didn't have any CGT liability why would she need to notify?
I was only commenting on the rules that would allow a discovery assessment to be made. If she calculated that she didn't have any CGT liability why would she need to notify?
She has already confirmed she didn't consider CGT at the time and has taken retrospective tax advice. If that's correct, there's no issue.
If HMRC decide to open a review, she can rely on the PI cover of the accountant/tax adviser if HMRC disagree.
Wombat3 said:
There are requirements to report transactions (over a certain value) that could be subject to CGT even if none is actually due i.e. if you sold £20K's worth of shares you would still need to report it even if you made nothing AFAIK.
I'm pretty sure that would apply if you were selling a property which was not your main residence. In the case of property I think the requirement used to be that you had to file the return within 30 days of the sale (I believe its now 60 days).
Those CGT filing rules for residential property (30/60 days) weren't in place back then.I'm pretty sure that would apply if you were selling a property which was not your main residence. In the case of property I think the requirement used to be that you had to file the return within 30 days of the sale (I believe its now 60 days).
It's more than likely that she should have reported the sale on her tax return, but (reading between the lines) it appears she's working on the basis she had improvements to the property in addition to some PPR relief to reduce the gain so that no tax was due. If that's the case, HMRC won't care about the non-reporting if no tax was due and they would either close the case or not bother in the first place.
I just do not understand why she's being so coy about it though, especially given her stance on transparency for MPs.
EddieSteadyGo said:
Wombat3 said:
IIRC she was an MP when she sold the house & that is when the CGT liability would have arisen, if it did.
Realistically, if you owned a house, and you started a new relationship with a new partner who also owned their own house, and you paid for the upkeep of services on your original house and you also paid the mortgage. And they paid for the upkeep of services on their house and mortgage on their house. And then at some point you start living together and you start a family. Once the relationship seems stable you decide to sell your house and live in the one house together. Would you realistically expect to pay CGT on the gain of your original house?MaxFromage said:
Wombat3 said:
There are requirements to report transactions (over a certain value) that could be subject to CGT even if none is actually due i.e. if you sold £20K's worth of shares you would still need to report it even if you made nothing AFAIK.
I'm pretty sure that would apply if you were selling a property which was not your main residence. In the case of property I think the requirement used to be that you had to file the return within 30 days of the sale (I believe its now 60 days).
Those CGT filing rules for residential property (30/60 days) weren't in place back then.I'm pretty sure that would apply if you were selling a property which was not your main residence. In the case of property I think the requirement used to be that you had to file the return within 30 days of the sale (I believe its now 60 days).
It's more than likely that she should have reported the sale on her tax return, but (reading between the lines) it appears she's working on the basis she had improvements to the property in addition to some PPR relief to reduce the gain so that no tax was due. If that's the case, HMRC won't care about the non-reporting if no tax was due and they would either close the case or not bother in the first place.
I just do not understand why she's being so coy about it though, especially given her stance on transparency for MPs.
If she hasn't done anything wrong then why should she have to open up her private life to prove some unfounded allegations? It's a dumpster dive from the tories to see if they can find anything incriminating.
Wombat3 said:
The rules are (were) what they are. The timeline was not that short though, she married Mark Rayner in 2010
Yes, I realise the timelines were longer, as she married her husband in 2010 and decided to sell her original property in 2015. But even taking that into account, if you were in a similar situation, would you expect to pay CGT when you sold your original home?This type of situation must have happened millions of times before, when people start new relationships and they need to sell one of their existing homes after getting together. I honestly doubt people are expecting to pay CGT when one of those original homes gets sold.
sugerbear said:
Because everyone is entitled to privacy in their private lives. She wasn't an MP when the allegations are said to have occurred.
If she hasn't done anything wrong then why should she have to open up her private life to prove some unfounded allegations? It's a dumpster dive from the tories to see if they can find anything incriminating.
And people are entitled to make adverse inferences from her coyness.If she hasn't done anything wrong then why should she have to open up her private life to prove some unfounded allegations? It's a dumpster dive from the tories to see if they can find anything incriminating.
deadslow said:
simples, this keeps the daily/weekly/monthly/permanent trainwreck of a government off the front pages. The end.
No, I don't think the police criteria for using their most experienced officers rather than a freshly qualified DC is that the government is behind in the polls.heebeegeetee said:
Quote from the Mail (I know...) "Yesterday, GMP Chief Constable Stephen Watson said there were 'a number of assertions knocking about' and his officers were 'going to get to the bottom of what has happened'."
As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
You just have to let it run its course and GMP do their job. Then move on. As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
S600BSB said:
heebeegeetee said:
Quote from the Mail (I know...) "Yesterday, GMP Chief Constable Stephen Watson said there were 'a number of assertions knocking about' and his officers were 'going to get to the bottom of what has happened'."
As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
You just have to let it run its course and GMP do their job. Then move on. As others have said, it's good to hear that crime has been sorted in Manchester. Obviously, if they've time to investigate £1500 of tax dodged 10 years ago, and time to see if there's anything else out of order, I imagine there must be squads of coppers descending when someone say, gets a £50k car nicked.
What I can't understand is the lack of police action towards Tories and/or elites (thinking of Post Office, likes of Mone etc).
The police wouldn't investigate Partygate, indeed they stood outside while it happened, they probably opened doors for people.
But they can investigate "assertions knocking about" concerning a Labour politician? Methinks GMP Chief Constable Stephen Watson need to think who's going to be in government next.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff