David Laws has fallen

[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:

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]

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]

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.

[Slyspy]

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]

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]

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.

[Beskar]

I'd have to agree with Beskar on this one. Save for a few or the more liberal districts, being a homosexual in the USA is a political liability. Thankfully, this is far less so than it was and will likely become an irrelevance (at least for someone who is not cheating on a spouse thereby) in the near future as our attitudes are rapidly shifting. However, to date, Beskar's assessment is more or less valid. He might, however, have taken a less "trolling" tone in his presentation thereof.

I apologise for the "trolling" tone. I admit, I was unamused we were being accused of being homophobic from a nation where it is a massive political liability when the topic was about nothing of the sort.

[rory_20_uk]

Mandleson can give out money to whoever for several years - earning the crown as the politician writing the most directions to civil servants (for events they view as suspect or possibly illegal). Of course, nothing will happen to him.

This chap is certainly not whiter than white. But one has to gain perspective on things. Sure, he should pay it all back (as many others have done) but he was one of the minority who would be good at the job he was doing. His loss is far greater than the money that he misappropriated - although many others took a lot more for a lot longer.

[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.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

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.

This is my take on it. He'd either have to move out (and possibly incur rent on a property he'd presumably not be in most of the time) or come out. It has also been pointed out that "partner" means "one who fulfills the role of a spouse" and it seems the clandestine nature of their relationship precluded this; no joint bank account for starters.

So technically he may not have actually done anything wrong. Hopefully the Commission will come to this sensible conclusion and he can get back to kidding the daisy out of the Civil Service in short order.

[Myrddraal]

I also laughed at the ridiculous claim from the telegraph that they never meant to expose his sexuality by reporting this article. Looks like an editor realised they might not be doing the pubic, the government, Laws, or themselves any favours.

[drone]

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.

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]

Sounds a lot like the start of the Obama administration.

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

[drone]

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?

[Beskar]

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

He gave Obama a lovely debt. The whole debt/money crisis was there before Obama. I remember the stuff back in 2003/2004 about the massive US debt problem, it was even in a online flash game about Bush (platform side-scroll) that went in all the details about the bogus plans and other issues, including Enron.

[Pannonian]

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 they were prosecuting people for HB claims on that basis dating back before that time, so it used to be one law for ordinary people, another for MPs (literally). Good to know it's now the same for all people, rather than the law persecuting relatively poor people whilst excusing MPs.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Let's not go derailing this thread with US politics, please.

Thank you kindly.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Let's not go derailing this thread with US politics, please.

Thank you kindly.

Agreed, ANYTHING but that. Bunch of whinging.....oops, sorry.

[Myrddraal]

And they were prosecuting people for HB claims on that basis dating back before that time, so it used to be one law for ordinary people, another for MPs (literally). Good to know it's now the same for all people, rather than the law persecuting relatively poor people whilst excusing MPs.

True enough, but not really pertinent to David Law's personal case.