Labour's Deputy Leader, Angela Rayner, is at the centre of a fresh political storm following revelations about the sale of her former council house. A detailed investigation has uncovered a timeline of events that tax experts are describing as a 'remarkable coincidence', potentially saving her a significant sum in Capital Gains Tax (CGT).
The controversy hinges on the sale of her ex-council property in Vicarage Road, Stockport, which she purchased under the Right-to-Buy scheme in 2007 for £79,000. The property was sold in March 2015 for £127,500, netting a substantial gain.
The Tax Rule That Made All The Difference
At the heart of the matter is a crucial tax regulation. For a property to be considered a taxpayer's main residence and thus qualify for Private Residence Relief (PRR) – which exempts the gain from CGT – the owner must have lived in it as their primary home for the entire period of ownership up to the point of sale.
Critically, in 2015, the rules surrounding this relief were tightened. Before April 6th, 2015, homeowners had a generous 36-month 'final period exemption' where the property was still considered their main residence for tax purposes after moving out. After this date, that window was slashed to just 18 months.
A Timeline That Raises Eyebrows
According to Land Registry documents, Ms. Rayner's sale was finalized on March 27th, 2015. This was a mere ten days before the new, stricter 18-month rule came into force on April 6th.
This timing is pivotal. If she had sold the house after April 6th and could not prove it was her main residence for the entire period, she could have faced a CGT bill of approximately £1,700 if it was her main home, or a staggering £65,000 if it was not. By selling just before the deadline, she benefited from the more generous 36-month rule, potentially shielding the entire gain from tax.
Questions Over 'Principal Private Residence'
The situation is further complicated by questions regarding which property was truly her 'principal private residence'. At the time of the sale, Ms. Rayner was also listed at a different address in Lowndes Lane, where her now-husband lived. Neighbours from Vicarage Road have given conflicting accounts, with some insisting she had moved out years earlier.
This has led tax experts to question the legitimacy of the PRR claim. If HMRC were to investigate and determine that Vicarage Road was not her main residence throughout the entire period of ownership, she could be liable for back taxes, interest, and penalties.
Ms. Rayner and the Labour Party have consistently stated that she followed all tax rules and that Vicarage Road was her main home. However, the precise timing of the sale, juxtaposed with the imminent tax change, continues to fuel scrutiny and demands for greater transparency.
