Angela Rayner has “played by the rules” when it comes to her tax affairs, her shadow cabinet colleague has said, amid further claims around her former living arrangements.
Labour’s deputy leader has come under the spotlight in recent weeks over the sale of an ex-council house she previously owned in Stockport, having been accused of avoiding capital gains tax on it – something she has denied.
The allegations centre around whether the property was her primary residence, as she claims – or whether she was actually living at her then husband’s address nearby, making her liable for capital gains after the sale of the property.
The Mail on Sunday has now claimed to have seen dozens of social media posts from the Labour MP between 2010 and 2015, which it said showed her now ex’s address was her main property.
But shadow foreign secretary David Lammy told Sky News that all the report showed was “like so many families across the country [Ms Rayner] had and has a blended family,” adding: “Like everybody else, she had a complicated life and spent time in her husband’s place but also her place. Lots of families do that.”
Speaking on Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips, the fellow Labour MP said Ms Rayner had “done nothing wrong” and had the “full support” of the party.
But challenged over why she would not publish her tax returns, having called on Rishi Sunak to do so, Mr Lammy said: “I think there’s a different arrangement and expectation for the prime minister than there is in this context and we are not yet in government.”
He said the allegations were being spread as part of the “political season” and to distract from “Tory chaos”.
Advertisement
Mr Lammy concluded: “She has played by the rules… I am confident that Angela has done nothing wrong here at all.”
Rayner claims turning into political headache for Labour
Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner is facing fresh questions over her tax affairs – and there’s a feeling in Westminster that they will not be the last.
It’s the same allegation that keeps popping up around whether she paid enough tax on the sale of her home in Stockport in 2015.
She has always maintained she has done nothing wrong – she also said she had expert tax advice, which has “confirmed” her position.
The rules around capital gains tax are somewhat complex.
Married couples can only have one principal residence for capital gains tax purposes but if the couple own more than one home then they are free to choose which is their principal residence.
And clearly social media postings are not conclusive.
The bigger problem for Ms Rayner politically is that she’s not currently willing to publish tax advice which she claims exonerates her and has not shown it to the party leader Sir Keir Starmer.
Without that, the Conservatives are keen to carry on questioning whether she fully followed the rules around this property.
Whether she has broken the rules is unclear but what is becoming apparent is how quickly this is turning into a political headache for the Labour Party.
Deputy chairman of the Conservative Party James Daly called on Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer to “show some leadership and open a full, transparent and independent investigation into the Rayner scandal”.
He said Ms Rayner should “stop dismissing and distracting and come clean now”.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
In response to the Mail’s claims, a Labour Party spokesperson said: “Angela and her husband mutually decided to maintain their existing residences to reflect their family’s circumstances and they shared childcare responsibilities.
“Angela has always made clear she also spent time at her husband’s property when they had children and got married. She was perfectly entitled to do so.”
Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.
It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.
But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.
Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”
The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.
And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.
Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.
Advertisement
He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.
“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”
Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.
Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.
However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:28
Farming industry is feeling ‘betrayed’ – NFU boss
Government figures ‘misleading’
The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.
Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.
Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.
Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.
APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.
Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.