Your lover has it wrong.
Angela Rayner has admitted underpaying stamp duty on a seaside flat
uk.news.yahoo.com
It's possible.
Grok:
Based on expert analyses and HMRC's penalty framework for Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) underpayments, the probability that HMRC fully accepts Angela Rayner's explanation—treating the error as non-punishable due to reasonable reliance on professional advice, with no penalty imposed—is estimated at around 20-30%. This assessment considers her self-reporting, the nature of the initial advice, and precedents where penalties are often applied even when advice was sought.
### Key Factors Influencing HMRC's Decision
- **Classification as Careless vs. Deliberate**: HMRC distinguishes between "careless" errors (up to 30% penalty on underpaid tax) and "deliberate" ones (70% or higher). Rayner's case appears unlikely to be deemed deliberate, as there's no evidence of intent to evade tax; she relied on initial advice from a conveyancer and trust experts, later corrected by a tax barrister. Experts like Sean Randall and James Quarmby agree it's probably careless, reducing the chance of severe penalties but not eliminating them.
- **Reliance on Professional Advice**: HMRC may waive or suspend penalties if "reasonable care" was taken, such as seeking qualified advice. However, Rayner's initial advisers were not confirmed tax specialists, and experts note that blaming advisers isn't always a defense if the advice was "obviously wrong" or details (e.g., about her son's trust) weren't fully disclosed. Precedents show penalties upheld despite advice, like a case where a 19.5% penalty was imposed on a careless SDLT return.
- **Self-Reporting and Disclosure**: Her unprompted contact with HMRC after media scrutiny could mitigate penalties (0-30% range for careless unprompted disclosures). But HMRC issues thousands of penalties annually for careless errors (e.g., over 18,000 in one year across taxes), suggesting waivers aren't routine.
- **Expert Risk Assessments**: Tax specialists describe a "significant" or "high" risk of fines (e.g., 20-30% of the £40,000 underpayment, or £8,000-£12,000). No experts predict full acceptance without repercussions, though political scrutiny might encourage leniency.
### Potential Outcomes
| Outcome | Description | Estimated Probability | Rationale |
|---------|-------------|-----------------------|-----------|
| Full Acceptance (No Penalty) | HMRC deems reasonable care taken; error excused with only back tax paid. | 20-30% | Low due to non-specialist initial advice and HMRC's scrutiny of disclosure quality. |
| Reduced/Suspended Penalty | Careless classification with partial waiver or suspension (e.g., conditions like improved compliance). | 50-60% | Common for self-corrections; HMRC can suspend careless penalties. |
| Full Penalty Imposed | 15-30% fine on underpaid amount, plus interest. | 20-30% | High if HMRC views advice reliance as inadequate. |
These probabilities are subjective estimates derived from expert commentary and HMRC patterns, as no official statistics exist on waiver rates for similar SDLT cases. HMRC has up to 12 months (or longer for careless errors) to assess, so the outcome may evolve. If new details emerge, this could shift.
