Rayner has right to spend money as she chooses, says Phillipson in row over flat
A Cabinet minister has said it is up to Angela Rayner how she spends her money as criticism continued over her purchase of an £800,000 flat in Hove.
The Deputy Prime Minister represents a constituency in Greater Manchester and has a grace and favour flat in Westminster.
The Tories have called for her to face an ethics inquiry over the tax affairs relating to the purchase.
Rules and requirements
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said: “Angela Rayner has been clear that she followed all the rules and requirements of her, that she has followed the rules completely.
“That is her position, that she has done everything that has been asked of her.”
Asked whether there is anything hypocritical about the Deputy Prime Minister’s actions, Ms Phillipson told Times Radio: “If an individual wants to buy a property, whether that individual is Angela Rayner or anybody else, they are entirely within their rights to spend their money as they choose.
“I’ve never gone in for that way of approaching things, that somehow people shouldn’t have that kind of choice. My politics is actually about people having more choices over what they do with their own money and their own lives and Angela Rayner, as an adult with a salary, is able to make choices about how she spends her own money.
“She’s an adult, if she wants to buy a flat she can buy a flat. That’s just the top and bottom of it.
“So long as she’s followed all of the rules and requirements as a part of that, then I don’t think there’s anything more.”
Stamp duty
Ms Rayner, who is also the Housing Secretary, is reported to have saved £40,000 in stamp duty on the flat because she removed her name from the deed to a family property in her Ashton-under-Lyne constituency, meaning the Hove property is the only property she owns.
However, Ms Rayner also previously indicated the Greater Manchester home remains her primary residence, according to the Telegraph, saving some £2,000 in council tax on her grace and favour home in central London at Admiralty House.
The Mail On Sunday reported she split the ownership of her £650,000 constituency home with a trust administered by law firm Shoosmiths.
The newspaper suggested the legal manoeuvre would be consistent with Ms Rayner placing some of the house’s equity in trust for her three children, but the Tories questioned whether the move was intended to avoid potential inheritance tax liabilities.
Ms Rayner divorced her husband and no longer owns a stake in the Greater Manchester home but still considers it her primary residence because her children live there.
Ethics
The Tories have called for the Prime Minister’s ethics adviser Sir Laurie Magnus to examine whether she has breached the ministerial code.
Tory Party chairman Kevin Hollinrake said Ms Rayner should “come clean on the litany of accusations of tax avoidance – be it stamp duty, council tax or inheritance tax”.
He had originally called for Sir Laurie to investigate after it was reported Ms Rayner paid £30,000 instead of £70,000 on the Hove property because it was the only one she owned, but he said the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards should also look at the Ashton-under-Lyne trust.
Mr Hollinrake told the Mail On Sunday: “What implications does putting her Ashton-under-Lyne house into a trust have for inheritance tax?
“Tax avoidance may be entirely lawful – and many families will rightly want to minimise their inheritance tax to hand over as much as possible to their children and grandchildren, especially in the face of Labour’s cruel family farms and family business taxes.
“But it’s the height of hypocrisy for a Labour politician who wants to hike property taxes for everyone else, and lectured others on tax avoidance, to appear to be doing the very same.”
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
Surely the inheritance tax question would only arise if Angela Rayner died within 7 years and we hope she has a lot longer than that.
But did she make the decision based on an understanding of any changes that Reeves future budget plans might impose?
Speak for yourself
From what I can see, she has not broken any rules and in a far better way than many Tory party multiple home owners who also use the same rules.
Citing mail sort of not a good thing given their record bending the truth beyond recognition.
And indeed plaid MSs who have multiple homes!
She’s clearly done nothing wrong, apart from being brought up on a council estate and having an accent
CHAV
Yes, she, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, has the right to spend her own money. I agree. Even politicians are afforded that right. Usually it’s our money they spend. But what she doesn’t have is the right to cynically avoid paying £40,000 in stamp duty by purchasing for £800K a flat hundreds of miles away in Hove, then state it’s her primary residence, when it’s not, avoiding tax while having a Ministerial grace and favour property provided in London and a house in Greater Manchester, you know, where her constituency is. This reeks of Labour corruption. It’s “do as I… Read more »
I understand the divorce has an impact here. In that the family home, removed her name from the deeds cos she no longer lives there and bought the flat in Brighton. There is no rule that says where primary has to be and many MP’s are outside where their seat is.
My main takeaway is that has been bigged up the Tory party that does the same and a press that will just attack her because they hate her.
Spot on. Completely in the rules. She still uses the family home as a principle residence as she has to looks after the kids, but as she’s taken her name off the deeds so has no ownership. It’s probably part of the divorce settlement
The inference with Hove change is that she’s paving way for a change in Parliamentary Constituency in a safe seat as many polls have predicted she may lose her current seat at future election.
Spot on.
Champagne socialism? If she had volunteered to pay tax she wasn’t liable for, you’d be screaming “virtue signalling”! For your sort, any stick is good enough to beat the donkey.
She does have the right to spend her money as she pleases, but it’s the hypocrisy which is so disturbing in her behaviour. From what I understand, she has used every trick in the book to avoid paying £40,000 stamp duty, but she has pounced in the past on the Tories or anyone else for not paying their taxes. Furthermore, she has every right to own three homes, yet she continues to complain about a housing crisis where more homes are needed, despite two of her homes being empty. And let’s not forget that she is the Minister of Housing.… Read more »
You are right. She has the right to spend her money as she pleases and take steps within current law to mitigate her liability to taxes. Nevertheless it’s a bit rich to spend so much time hammering others who have done much the same thing and generally pontificate about the unfairness of the UK’s housing and property market.
She only owns one property according to the article.
She doesn’t own three homes, she owns one home. Try getting your facts right before opining.
Flaunting it! Making a mockery of her Socialist credentials.
If owning a property is unsocialist what does that say about Mr Corbyn and his £1m+ pad?
Do you mean the “pad” he bought years ago when it was cheap (relative to wages at the time), and has lived in for years? Asset price inflation wasn’t Corbyn’s fault. There are many working-class families in London who live in “£1m+ pads”, do you want to have a cheap poke at them too?
Ask Charles, I’m not the one suggesting a good socialist shouldn’t own their home.
That’s what it sounded like.
She does but she should apply the same rules as she is expecting other people to abide by. No more freebies
Which rule isn’t she abiding by?
Spot on. Unlike many tories, she hasn’t broken any rules, but that will make no difference to the hard of thinking..
What freebies? Do you want Starmer to move out of number 10, or Reeves to vacate number 11?
The wider issue that nobody is taking about here is that somebody whose career has been mostly in public service and union roles can afford an £800k second home. The enrichment of our political class from the public purse and union dues is scandalous. I am not suggesting Angela Rayner is unusual in this regard, but she is a good example of a problem that runs through public life.
As a cabinet minister Angela Rayner gets the basic salary of £93000, plus additional payments corresponding to her role. That means the cost of her Brighton property is around 6 or 7 times her income. This is about average these days. We don’t know how much deposit she was able to pay either. At least you admit she is not unusual, but to suggest as you do that politicians are enriching themselves from the public purse is a lazy right-wing trope. I wouldn’t want to be an MP on £93,000, that is a pitifully low payment for the amount of… Read more »
I don’t take issue with the salary – and bear in mind she has been a cabinet minister for only a year, and is unlikely to remain one for the term of any mortgage. I take issue with whatever is going on in the background that allows somebody to enter politics and amass £5 million net worth, which is increasing at half a million per year – well in excess of her salary and other income declared to IPSA. Again, I must stress, Angela Rayner is not the problem, the system is the problem. The historical transfer of power from… Read more »