David Laws has fallen

**Slyspy** · 05-30-2010, 18:23

The thing is he didn't actually fiddle his expenses. He merely paid rent to someone he shouldn't have. The expenses would have been completely ligit if his landlord had not also been his lover. Further, until 2006 even this was OK, while the rules introduced last year describe "partner" as someone fulfilling the role of a spouse which is hardly as clear as one would hope. I feel genuinely sorry for Laws, a man who seems to have allowed his (maybe unwarranted) fears to rule him.

**Pannonian** · 05-30-2010, 19:18

Originally Posted by Slyspy

The thing is he didn't actually fiddle his expenses. He merely paid rent to someone he shouldn't have. The expenses would have been completely ligit if his landlord had not also been his lover. Further, until 2006 even this was OK, while the rules introduced last year describe "partner" as someone fulfilling the role of a spouse which is hardly as clear as one would hope. I feel genuinely sorry for Laws, a man who seems to have allowed his (maybe unwarranted) fears to rule him.

If we're talking about housing benefits or their like, the state doesn't pay HB to contribute towards a household. If renter and landlord are part of the same household, the rent paid is assumed to be money kept inside the household, and the state does not reimburse any of that. Claim any of that back, and the state will prosecute you for benefits fraud.

**Furunculus** · 05-30-2010, 19:35

looks like he will be back in government before long:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...overnment.html

a fact which won't please the beard-n-sandals end of the lib-dem spectrum, because they know the orange-bookers have the upper hand right now and that a purge of one or the other is coming if the party is to be truly consistent to a set of core principles.

where would the beardies live then, they are a bit like panda bears; utterly incapable of surviving in the wild!

**Louis VI the Fat** · 05-31-2010, 02:55

Oopsy...

David Law's successor as Treasury Chief, Danny Alexander, barely in office for one day, avoided capital gains tax on his second home:

Mr Alexander, who was appointed on Saturday after the resignation of fellow Liberal Democrat David Laws, designated the property as his second home for the purpose of claiming parliamentary expenses but described it to HM Revenue and Customs as his main home.

Last night Mr Alexander admitted that he took advantage of a loophole to legally avoid paying CGT on the sale of the south London property for £300,000 in June 2007.

The disclosure that he failed to pay CGT comes at a particularly sensitive time because the Coalition is planning to increase the rate of the tax for owners of second homes and buy-to-let properties in an emergency budget next month.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-on-house.html

Maybe Greece...erm...I mean the UK ought to accept that tax evasion, fraud and expenses abuse is the standard of its governing class.

There will be nobody left to govern if this sort of corruption is an impediment.

Must be a bummer for the tax paying middle classes though, for this lot to be in charge of raising taxes and squeezing them out for all their worth to pay for the millionaire bailout.

**Philippus Flavius Homovallumus** · 05-31-2010, 10:56

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Oopsy...

David Law's successor as Treasury Chief, Danny Alexander, barely in office for one day, avoided capital gains tax on his second home:

Maybe Greece...erm...I mean the UK ought to accept that tax evasion, fraud and expenses abuse is the standard of its governing class.

There will be nobody left to govern if this sort of corruption is an impediment.

Must be a bummer for the tax paying middle classes though, for this lot to be in charge of raising taxes and squeezing them out for all their worth to pay for the millionaire bailout.

Hmmm, Danny Alexander hasn't looked like much other than a scared and surprised rabbit for the last two weeks. The Liberals will need to produce better metal if they want to keep those five seats at the table.

**Furunculus** · 05-31-2010, 11:03

losing David Laws at the Treasury is a blow, not just to the government, but also to Britain's ability to deal with the recession and to convince the markets that we are dealing with our deficit.

**drone** · 06-01-2010, 03:59

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

David Law's successor as Treasury Chief, Danny Alexander, barely in office for one day, avoided capital gains tax on his second home:

Maybe Greece...erm...I mean the UK ought to accept that tax evasion, fraud and expenses abuse is the standard of its governing class.

There will be nobody left to govern if this sort of corruption is an impediment.

Must be a bummer for the tax paying middle classes though, for this lot to be in charge of raising taxes and squeezing them out for all their worth to pay for the millionaire bailout.

Sounds a lot like the start of the Obama administration.

Originally Posted by Myrddraal

For those of you still confused about what this expenses claim has to do with his sexuality, I'll try to explain what I've understood of the situation. Before 2006 it was perfectly OK for MPs to use the expenses system to pay rent to a partner. David Laws therefore used the expenses system to do just that. In 2006 the rules changed. Had David Laws stopped claiming these expenses, it would have been clear that his landlord was his partner and that he was therefore gay. He obviously thought he could hide all this and simply carry on as before, a foolish thing to think surely, but a long way from a selfish desire to enrich himself off the back of the taxpayer.

And in all fairness, as a LibDem did he realistically expect to be placed in a position of power where this would become an issue?

**Beskar** · 06-01-2010, 04:15

Originally Posted by drone

Sounds a lot like the start of the Obama administration.

Some one had to recieve the buck after the mess Bush jr made.

**drone** · 06-01-2010, 05:12

Originally Posted by Beskar

Some one had to recieve the buck after the mess Bush jr made.

So Bush forced Obama to appoint tax cheats to federal office? Including the Secretary of the Treasury?

**Slyspy** · 05-31-2010, 14:50

Originally Posted by Pannonian

If we're talking about housing benefits or their like, the state doesn't pay HB to contribute towards a household. If renter and landlord are part of the same household, the rent paid is assumed to be money kept inside the household, and the state does not reimburse any of that. Claim any of that back, and the state will prosecute you for benefits fraud.

But we aren't talking about housing benefit.

**Ja'chyra** · 05-31-2010, 20:56

The only shame is that he resigned and wasn't sacked and charged with fraud, as I would have been as a civil servant

**Pannonian** · 05-31-2010, 21:04

Originally Posted by Slyspy

But we aren't talking about housing benefit.

Quelle difference. The principle is that the state doesn't pay for you to give money to others inside the household. When you pay rent, and you claim some of that back, in any form, from the state, the state assumes you're paying to an outside agency. You're not seeing any of that money back, so the state reimburses you. If you're paying the rent to your partner, you're basically transferring money from one part of your household to another. You're not really paying rent, you're just giving another family member part access to your accounts. The state does not reimburse you for any of that, and if you claim it, you're committing fraud.