FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Kier Starmer avoided inheritance tax
Kier Starmer avoided inheritance tax
Jump to: Newest in thread
A Sunday Times investigation has revealed that Keir Starmer transferred a seven-acre plot in Oxted, Surrey, into a discretionary trust around 2006-2008, potentially shielding it from 40% inheritance tax and saving up to £720,000 when sold in 2022 for £1.5-2 million.
The trust, with Starmer's late parents as beneficiaries and himself as a potential recipient, was not disclosed in his parliamentary register of interests, and his office has not responded to inquiries.
The allegations surface amid Labour's October 2024 budget capping agricultural property relief at £1 million, which has drawn protests from farmers facing higher estate taxes. A reported six farmers committed suicide over labour's iht proposals. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site) 31 weeks ago
|
No great surprise.
I imagine there is going to be quite a lot we will find out about Starmer in due course.
“All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others”.
Thus Socialism always ends, with the Party elites enjoying their dachas in the countryside while the masses queue around the block for half a loaf of stale bread. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 31 weeks ago
|
The ending sentence of George Orwell's Animal Farm: "The other farm animals looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I suspect there is a good reason that none of the usual media channels are giving this any airtime at all, because it is a non story. Other than GB News of course.
For those that don't realise it, you can not avoid inheritance tax by passing it UP a generation (which is what Starmer has done). This would have been done for other reasons, which in the Sunday Times rush to get this out, they obviously ignored. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 31 weeks ago
|
"I suspect there is a good reason that none of the usual media channels are giving this any airtime at all, because it is a non story. Other than GB News of course.
For those that don't realise it, you can not avoid inheritance tax by passing it UP a generation (which is what Starmer has done). This would have been done for other reasons, which in the Sunday Times rush to get this out, they obviously ignored."
Maybe, but like Rayner, the optics ain't good in our national leaders. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I suspect there is a good reason that none of the usual media channels are giving this any airtime at all, because it is a non story. Other than GB News of course.
For those that don't realise it, you can not avoid inheritance tax by passing it UP a generation (which is what Starmer has done). This would have been done for other reasons, which in the Sunday Times rush to get this out, they obviously ignored."
Other tax avoidance reasons presumably. Why else would you put land into a trust and then sell it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
He might have done nothing wrong, but when you are on The Left this kind of chicanery - if done to avoid tax - should be & will be frowned upon.
We’d expect this from The Right, it’s all they are about. Hording nuts all for themselves & feck wider society in the process. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Other tax avoidance reasons presumably. Why else would you put land into a trust and then sell it. "
Ohhhh, don't get me wrong. It is without any doubt some sort of tax avoidance wheeze. It defo is not though an attempt to avoid inheritance tax.
When he did sell the land, it still cost him £52,688 in CGT on the profit he made. What we don't know though is how many other people were involved in taking that profit. As it sold for £1.5m to £2m, there would have been quite a few people paying £52,688 each. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He might have done nothing wrong, but when you are on The Left this kind of chicanery - if done to avoid tax - should be & will be frowned upon.
We’d expect this from The Right, it’s all they are about. Hording nuts all for themselves & feck wider society in the process."
The British tax code, rapidly beginning to look like the most disingenuous in the world, is currently in excess of 17,000 pages. It has more than trebled in size since 1997.
The Hong Kong tax code is 276 pages.
This is why so many people are involved in this chicanery. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No great surprise.
I imagine there is going to be quite a lot we will find out about Starmer in due course.
“All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others”.
Thus Socialism always ends, with the Party elites enjoying their dachas in the countryside while the masses queue around the block for half a loaf of stale bread."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Other tax avoidance reasons presumably. Why else would you put land into a trust and then sell it.
Ohhhh, don't get me wrong. It is without any doubt some sort of tax avoidance wheeze. It defo is not though an attempt to avoid inheritance tax.
When he did sell the land, it still cost him £52,688 in CGT on the profit he made. What we don't know though is how many other people were involved in taking that profit. As it sold for £1.5m to £2m, there would have been quite a few people paying £52,688 each."
Potentially except transfer into the trust under seven year rule likely to have been tax free. CGT rates on land held in a trust were 20% in 2022, personal marginal cgt rates 10% - 28%. Iht 40%.
Clearly more to this than he wants to say, so best he encouraged to lay out all the details to show how this avoidance scheme has worked and how much he has saved in tax.
Let voters judge for themselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I suspect there is a good reason that none of the usual media channels are giving this any airtime at all, because it is a non story. Other than GB News of course.
For those that don't realise it, you can not avoid inheritance tax by passing it UP a generation (which is what Starmer has done). This would have been done for other reasons, which in the Sunday Times rush to get this out, they obviously ignored."
Did you not know or realise. ..
The Usual other media channels are Government Influenced.! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Did you not know or realise. ..
The Usual other media channels are Government Influenced.!"
I'd like to know in what way Aljazzera and Fox News are influenced by a UK Government, perhaps you could enlighten me ?
As i said, not one of the mainstream media outlets has carried this story at all (other than GB News, for obvious reasons). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Did you not know or realise. ..
The Usual other media channels are Government Influenced.!
I'd like to know in what way Aljazzera and Fox News are influenced by a UK Government, perhaps you could enlighten me ?
As i said, not one of the mainstream media outlets has carried this story at all (other than GB News, for obvious reasons)."
aye ... and if all this bluster from the usual fascerati about how reform will be in government, that'll mean that the the rest of the media will be anti-establishment and anti-metropolitan elite, while the only government influenced news channel will be GammonBrexitNews. will the arseholes abandon them at that point? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *coptoCouple 31 weeks ago
Côte d'Azur & Great Yarmouth |
Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 31 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not..."
What we "deserve" is what we voted for. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 31 weeks ago
|
"Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not..."
I'd rather like my elected politicians to pay their 'full whack' - I don't see many ordinary people setting up trusts to avoid IHT nor CGT. Most just cough-up and pay it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not..."
The system deliberately rigged (17,000 pages of tax code) so that the dummies can’t afford to take expert and expensive advice. Case in point the young duke of Westminster who inherited a £9bn London property portfolio via an old trust HMRC couldn’t be bothered to challenge. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Seems the times have been gaslighting GB News
Starmer just interviewed by LK
Starmer bought his parents a field at the back of their house for £20,000 because his mother liked donkeys. He later sold it for almost £300,000 in 2022. The obvious structure would be that Starmer owned the land throughout this period, while his parents simply used it for their donkeys
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *I TwoCouple 31 weeks ago
near enough |
"Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not...
I'd rather like my elected politicians to pay their 'full whack' - I don't see many ordinary people setting up trusts to avoid IHT nor CGT. Most just cough-up and pay it."
Perhaps you don't see it but that doesn't mean it's not happening. Any decent solicitor/IFA will recommend ways and with the new inheritance tax system coming in there will be a wrath of ways to reduce it.
Only an utter fool pays tax without question. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 31 weeks ago
|
"Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not..."
34yrs a soldier just about afford a shitty little fat let alone a second home...but see your pintif legal crack on...interestingly he stated this morning he bought it for 20grand ...he stated no trust was set up ...presumably given his drawing out about it being gift to his mother when she was ill...she was thta not in dispute...if the gift went over the seven year ruling what is wrong? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 31 weeks ago
|
"Seems the times have been gaslighting GB News
Starmer just interviewed by LK
Starmer bought his parents a field at the back of their house for £20,000 because his mother liked donkeys. He later sold it for almost £300,000 in 2022. The obvious structure would be that Starmer owned the land throughout this period, while his parents simply used it for their donkeys
He didn't say on LK tht HE sold it he said it was a gift for his parents...if so he wouldn't have been able to sell?
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *CExeCouple 31 weeks ago
Hong-Kong/Exeter |
I wonder if the folks supporting Starmer in this thread would change their tune if it were Boris or Rishi who'd done this? The fact Keir has his own private law in his name to protect his pension arrangements is bad enough. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not..."
I guess the problem here is hypocrisy rather than the act itself. Leading a party that has been whining about "those rich people who use tax avoidance loopholes" for years, only to be caught doing the same thing they are complaining about, doesn't sit well with voters. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I guess the problem here is hypocrisy rather than the act itself. Leading a party that has been whining about "those rich people who use tax avoidance loopholes" for years, only to be caught doing the same thing they are complaining about, doesn't sit well with voters."
No, it won't sit well with voters. Especially when it was set up years before he even became leader of Labour, let alone Prime minister. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
But Farage is clean !!!!
Deluded
"I suspect there is a good reason that none of the usual media channels are giving this any airtime at all, because it is a non story. Other than GB News of course.
For those that don't realise it, you can not avoid inheritance tax by passing it UP a generation (which is what Starmer has done). This would have been done for other reasons, which in the Sunday Times rush to get this out, they obviously ignored.
Maybe, but like Rayner, the optics ain't good in our national leaders."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Do we want in charge of our country people smart enough to arrange their affairs efficiently and economically (provided it's legal, of course) or dummies who blindly pay the full whack?
Has nobody on here negotiated down the purchase price of their house to reduce the Stamp Duty Land Tax? Or put the second residence in the wife's name only so she becomes a first-time buyer?
Or juggled the value of a deceased's estate to reduce inheritance tax?
Or perhaps not...
I guess the problem here is hypocrisy rather than the act itself. Leading a party that has been whining about "those rich people who use tax avoidance loopholes" for years, only to be caught doing the same thing they are complaining about, doesn't sit well with voters."
how is it hypocrisy exactly? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Meanwhile the owners' of The Times, the Murdoch Family are laughing all the way with their Trust Funds at the astonishing naivety of the OP and those like him.
The gullible are always the last to realise they have been played yet again |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Seems the times have been gaslighting GB News
Starmer just interviewed by LK
Starmer bought his parents a field at the back of their house for £20,000 because his mother liked donkeys. He later sold it for almost £300,000 in 2022. The obvious structure would be that Starmer owned the land throughout this period, while his parents simply used it for their donkeys
"
After having read all about this trust/scheme/vehicle, it is not at all clear that Starmer did anything wrong at all. Can anyone pinpoint anything immoral about what he did?
It looks like it was just some technical mumbo jumbo rusty caused people to sit up and start assuming the worst.
Perfectly happy to be corrected here, but there doesn't seem to be anything about which to complain in this whole business. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You can find ways legally to avoid tax
You can’t evade tax as that’s illegal .
Three simple things employees can get a tax allowance towards laundering works uniforms , using home electricity to run computers charge tools and an allowance for buying and replacing tools . Tax code goes up you pay less tax can be backdated . You pay less every year you use the allowances . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A Sunday Times investigation has revealed that Keir Starmer transferred a seven-acre plot in Oxted, Surrey, into a discretionary trust around 2006-2008, potentially shielding it from 40% inheritance tax and saving up to £720,000 when sold in 2022 for £1.5-2 million.
The trust, with Starmer's late parents as beneficiaries and himself as a potential recipient, was not disclosed in his parliamentary register of interests, and his office has not responded to inquiries.
The allegations surface amid Labour's October 2024 budget capping agricultural property relief at £1 million, which has drawn protests from farmers facing higher estate taxes. A reported six farmers committed suicide over labour's iht proposals. "
As is often the case, what he done is probably perfectly legal. The only problem is the optics given he currently leads the party that for many years has critised others for doing this type of thing, especially the previous bunch. Seems this government are in favour of do as I say not as I do |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As is often the case, what he done is probably perfectly legal. "
Unfortunately yes. This is what needs locking down and tightening up.
.
As of 2015, UK had some 200 tax manuals totalling about 80,000 pages (Source Till Wirth, 26 February 2015, https://insidegovuk.blog.gov.uk/
.
In comparison, Singapore, Income Tax Act (1,100 pages). Smaller, incentive-oriented system with fewer carve-outs; simpler landscape overall.
.
The more complicated and oblique you make something, the more opportunity that exists for "creative" solutions.
.
It does not need to be that complex, as other countries have demonstrated.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Anyone who's bought a bottle of duty free booze has committed tax avoidance. We'd all do it, given the chance.
I didn't vote for Starmer, but I think we hold our public figures to completely unrealistic standards. They are just people like everyone else, not saints. If he's done nothing illegal, then leave him alone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *as1373Couple 31 weeks ago
Taupo, New Zealand & Persian Gulf |
"Seems the times have been gaslighting GB News
Starmer just interviewed by LK
Starmer bought his parents a field at the back of their house for £20,000 because his mother liked donkeys. He later sold it for almost £300,000 in 2022. The obvious structure would be that Starmer owned the land throughout this period, while his parents simply used it for their donkeys
After having read all about this trust/scheme/vehicle, it is not at all clear that Starmer did anything wrong at all. Can anyone pinpoint anything immoral about what he did?
It looks like it was just some technical mumbo jumbo rusty caused people to sit up and start assuming the worst.
Perfectly happy to be corrected here, but there doesn't seem to be anything about which to complain in this whole business."
I think people are trying to find a scandal where there isn’t one. No media has touched it because he’s done nothing illegal.
I particularly didn’t refer to GB news as they are at pains to tell everyone they aren’t a media channel and it’s par for the course being who they. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 30 weeks ago
|
Done nothing illegal 🤔
Maybe but some of things he has done definitely should be illegal i.e having a man who'd never been in any trouble locked up for three years for attending a protest 'the man didn't belong in hail and took his own life' or how about the girl who got locked up for chasing a illegal immigrant out of her blind and disabled mum's house 'the illegal in question had no business being there and just walked on in' just two very clear cases of starmer being a complete tosser |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *onicZMan 30 weeks ago
Nottinghamshire |
"He might have done nothing wrong, but when you are on The Left this kind of chicanery - if done to avoid tax - should be & will be frowned upon.
We’d expect this from The Right, it’s all they are about. Hording nuts all for themselves & feck wider society in the process."
This is half the issue, starmer isn't on the left really. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
He trusted the land to his parents when he was still a solicitor, when it had a value of £95k. They used it as a Donkey Sanctuary (charity). When his parents died the land was valued at £295k.
There was no inheritance tax to pay, the land was his all along.
This was the Sunday Mail attempting to rustle up a scandal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Done nothing illegal 🤔
Maybe but some of things he has done definitely should be illegal i.e having a man who'd never been in any trouble locked up for three years for attending a protest 'the man didn't belong in hail and took his own life' or how about the girl who got locked up for chasing a illegal immigrant out of her blind and disabled mum's house 'the illegal in question had no business being there and just walked on in' just two very clear cases of starmer being a complete tosser "
Got legitimate links to these stories? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 30 weeks ago
|
"Done nothing illegal 🤔
Maybe but some of things he has done definitely should be illegal i.e having a man who'd never been in any trouble locked up for three years for attending a protest 'the man didn't belong in hail and took his own life' or how about the girl who got locked up for chasing a illegal immigrant out of her blind and disabled mum's house 'the illegal in question had no business being there and just walked on in' just two very clear cases of starmer being a complete tosser
Got legitimate links to these stories?"
There public knowledge so not difficult to find! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
