|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Mar 17, 2024 18:13:36 GMT
Don't worry we'll DEMAND she clears herself ........ LOL Surely before you do that you'd have to prove she has reasonably, and in line with current legal practise, been accused of a crime? Right-Wing rabid baiting on a forum / social-media platform isn't enough to meet that threshold, despite what Trump and his fellow-travellers might think. All The Best If you are innocent you'll 'willingly' give over any information that will clear your name, or clear it of any 'assumed' wrong doing, it's noticeable that BIG MOUTH Rayner is very reluctant to CLEAR THE AIR ........LOL..... enough said. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Mar 17, 2024 19:55:35 GMT
Surely before you do that you'd have to prove she has reasonably, and in line with current legal practise, been accused of a crime? Right-Wing rabid baiting on a forum / social-media platform isn't enough to meet that threshold, despite what Trump and his fellow-travellers might think. All The Best If you are innocent you'll 'willingly' give over any information that will clear your name, or clear it of any 'assumed' wrong doing, it's noticeable that BIG MOUTH Rayner is very reluctant to CLEAR THE AIR ........LOL..... enough said. Well, that kind of turns the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head somewhat, doesn't it? Surely a case for her at least being "potentially guilty in accordance with UK law" has to be made before she needs to present evidence of innocence? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Mar 17, 2024 20:00:52 GMT
If you are innocent you'll 'willingly' give over any information that will clear your name, or clear it of any 'assumed' wrong doing, it's noticeable that BIG MOUTH Rayner is very reluctant to CLEAR THE AIR ........LOL..... enough said. Well, that kind of turns the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head somewhat, doesn't it? Surely a case for her at least being "potentially guilty in accordance with UK law" has to be made before she needs to present evidence of innocence? All The Best Tax law You may be entitled to Private Residence Relief on any gain arising on the disposal of your only or main residence. You and your spouse or civil partner cannot have more than one residence or main residence between you for the purposes of the relief at any time while you’re living together (you are treated as living together unless you’re separated under a court order, or by Deed of Separation, or are otherwise separated in such circumstances that the separation is likely to be permanent)
www.gov.uk/government/publications/husband-and-wife-civil-partners-divorce-dissolution-and-separation-hs281-self-assessment-helpsheet/hs281-capital-gains-tax-civil-partners-and-spouses-2021#private-residence-relief
|
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Mar 17, 2024 20:03:51 GMT
OK, and does that prove that there is a case for Rayner to answer? Or is it just speculation? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Mar 17, 2024 20:17:56 GMT
OK, and does that prove that there is a case for Rayner to answer? Or is it just speculation? All The Best Of course it proves there is a case for HMRC , Mr and Mrs Ange both bought their own council houses which they owned on getting hitched , there is no dispute that they both kept their own properties until they were allowed to sell after a minimum period. Ange has stated that no cgt was paid. There's also a question of whether her house was rented out and the rent declared as income to HMRC. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Mar 17, 2024 20:27:46 GMT
OK, and does that prove that there is a case for Rayner to answer? Or is it just speculation? All The Best Of course it proves there is a case for HMRC , Mr and Mrs Ange both bought their own council houses which they owned on getting hitched , there is no dispute that they both kept their own properties until they were allowed to sell after a minimum period. Ange has stated that no cgt was paid. There's also a question of whether her house was rented out and the rent declared as income to HMRC. I think it may prove there is sufficient evidence for HMRC to take at least take a closer look. But surely only HMRC can decide if it provides sufficient proof that Rayner needs to present evidence of her innocence. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 17, 2024 21:17:56 GMT
Of course it proves there is a case for HMRC , Mr and Mrs Ange both bought their own council houses which they owned on getting hitched , there is no dispute that they both kept their own properties until they were allowed to sell after a minimum period. Ange has stated that no cgt was paid. There's also a question of whether her house was rented out and the rent declared as income to HMRC. I think it may prove there is sufficient evidence for HMRC to take at least take a closer look. But surely only HMRC can decide if it provides sufficient proof that Rayner needs to present evidence of her innocence. All The Best There is a strange thing around Parliament, not one of them is squeaky clean and they are always trying to commit assisted suicide. For sure by pointing out Angela Rayner's alleged misdemeanors, will bring a tit for tat backlash. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 17, 2024 21:37:35 GMT
Of course it proves there is a case for HMRC , Mr and Mrs Ange both bought their own council houses which they owned on getting hitched , there is no dispute that they both kept their own properties until they were allowed to sell after a minimum period. Ange has stated that no cgt was paid. There's also a question of whether her house was rented out and the rent declared as income to HMRC. I think it may prove there is sufficient evidence for HMRC to take at least take a closer look. But surely only HMRC can decide if it provides sufficient proof that Rayner needs to present evidence of her innocence. All The Best This isn’t a court of law . It’s an informal political forum where people informally discuss issues , political and otherwise . |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 17, 2024 23:18:41 GMT
According to the BBC today. Deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner will not face a police investigation over claims she gave false information on official documents. The MP had denied any wrongdoing relating to where she was registered as living after her marriage in 2010. Tory MP James Daly asked Greater Manchester Police to investigate whether she had given false information or had broken electoral rules. Police have found no evidence that any offence had been committed. The complaint followed claims made in a book by Lord Ashcroft, a former Conservative Party deputy chairman, about Ms Rayner's ex-council house on Vicarage Road in Stockport, Greater Manchester. IMO I do not understand why the Police investigated her in the first place, if as is suggested she did fail to declare her profit from the sale and may have been liable to pay tax and may have rented out her house and generated income IMO the people best suited to investigate her would be HMRC and as for any suggestion of false information relating to Electoral issue the Electoral Commission should have investigated that. It's all leftie pretend nothing to see here - police have supposedly ''investigated'' (just like beergate with her and Starmer getting off with clearly late night beer swilling whilst Boris got a ticket for a piece of cake whilst at work) It's purely a HMRC matter - nothing to do with the police All this whinging by Righties, all because they cannot come up with any unequivocal evidence. So typical of Righties who love insinuations and denigration. |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Mar 18, 2024 7:46:38 GMT
I think it may prove there is sufficient evidence for HMRC to take at least take a closer look. But surely only HMRC can decide if it provides sufficient proof that Rayner needs to present evidence of her innocence. All The Best This isn’t a court of law . It’s an informal political forum where people informally discuss issues , political and otherwise . Exactly plus Raynor does not have to prove her innocence at all no person suspected of an offence has to |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 18, 2024 9:27:39 GMT
This isn’t a court of law . It’s an informal political forum where people informally discuss issues , political and otherwise . Exactly plus Raynor does not have to prove her innocence at all no person suspected of an offence has to She has to restore her credibility and to do that she needs to clarify her situation . |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Mar 18, 2024 9:59:02 GMT
Exactly plus Raynor does not have to prove her innocence at all no person suspected of an offence has to She has to restore her credibility and to do that she needs to clarify her situation . Not IMHO it is for her accuser to prove guilt, I don't like her with all these accusations allegations smears made anyone would think there is GE in the offing , personally it just proves what a dirty nasty game Politics has become |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 18, 2024 10:02:55 GMT
She has to restore her credibility and to do that she needs to clarify her situation . Not IMHO it is for her accuser to prove guilt, I don't like her with all these accusations allegations smears made anyone would think there is GE in the offing , personally it just proves what a dirty nasty game Politics has become Exactly. Politics and political forums are not courtrooms . They are an environment for speculation and opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Mar 18, 2024 11:22:03 GMT
Well all Rayner has to do to stop the jibes is come clean.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt had the Tories in hysterics as he took a swipe at Angela Rayner while presenting his Spring Budget.
Referencing the Labour deputy leader’s “multiple dwellings”, Hunt jibed that Rayner was “paying close attention” as he unveiled his plan to axe multiple dwellings’ relief.
|
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Mar 18, 2024 11:39:48 GMT
Of course it proves there is a case for HMRC , Mr and Mrs Ange both bought their own council houses which they owned on getting hitched , there is no dispute that they both kept their own properties until they were allowed to sell after a minimum period. Ange has stated that no cgt was paid. There's also a question of whether her house was rented out and the rent declared as income to HMRC. I think it may prove there is sufficient evidence for HMRC to take at least take a closer look. But surely only HMRC can decide if it provides sufficient proof that Rayner needs to present evidence of her innocence. All The Best I agree whether her (and Mr Ange's) tax returns were accurately reported is an HMRC issue to investigate especially as she has stated that she did not pay cgt. Tax evasion is not investigated by the cops and the ''no case to answer'' yelps of indignation are merely white noise to try to divert the gullible away from an investigation. Nadhim Zahawi was fired from his Conservative job after settling an HMRC investigation into unpaid cgt |
|
