Shoosmiths distances itself as Angela Rayner tax row escalates

Avatar photo

By Legal Cheek on

17

National law firm confirms it did not advise deputy PM on £800k flat stamp duty error

Angela Rayner MP – Credit: Simon Dawson

Shoosmiths has moved to distance itself from the political row surrounding deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, after its name was wrongly linked to her £800,000 flat purchase that resulted in underpaid stamp duty.

The national law firm had previously acted for Rayner, and the BBC News reports it was responsible for setting up a trust for her son in 2020. This past connection fuelled speculation online that Shoosmiths had also advised on her property deal.

But the firm has now confirmed it gave no advice on the flat purchase that saw Rayner pay up to £40,000 less by not applying the higher rate of stamp duty reserved for additional homes.

A spokesperson for Shoosmiths said:

“We did not act for the Rt Hon Angela Rayner in relation to the purchase of her Hove property and/or the SDLT aspects of that property. Ms Rayner is not a current client of the firm and has not been for some time.”

The 2026 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

Rayner is facing calls to resign over the matter. The Labour MP has rejected claims she deliberately avoided tax, saying she relied on legal advice that did not “properly take account” of her circumstances.

Those circumstances include the court-ordered trust, created to manage compensation following a medical incident that left her son with life-long disabilities.

When her divorce was finalised in 2023, Rayner and her ex-husband transferred part of their stakes in the family home in Greater Manchester into the trust, where they both act as trustees.

This arrangement allowed for a “nesting” set-up, meaning the children could remain in the property while the parents alternated living there. Rayner later sold her remaining 25% stake in the home to the trust in January this year, receiving £162,500.

Rayner said she has contacted HMRC to clarify how much tax she owes.

The identity of the lawyer or firm she consulted is still unknown.

17 Comments

Concerned Individual

She should back up her words of one rule for them one rule for us, and be with the people, accept fault and resign. Or Starmer should grow a back bone and do what is correct and fire her.
If this was Tories they be shouting at the door, if this was a company they would be fired and never allowed to hold a board position.
One rule for them one rule for us.

Anonymous

If Shoosmiths were. The in-dependant trustee how did they satisfy themselves that it in the child’s best interest to pay his mother such a large sum for 25% when he was already living in the property? Presumably his parents were not going to kick the child out. It seems odd to make such a large payment bearing no interest when he has lived there for 9 years already.
Who gave advice on the value of the house at £650,000?
Who advanced this woman £650,000 with her current. Salary £67,505 as a minister and £93,904 as an MP and can anyone else borrow on the same terms?

Doggybix42

What are you on about?

Why would there be interest involved? You don’t know the trust’s assets so why you think they’d need a mortgage is a mystery.

As is why, if they did need to borrow, you think it was at 0%.

But not as mysterious as the fact that you think that when you take out a mortgage, you borrow the amount it will be worth when you finally sell the house. And that your available credit is based on what you’ll earn 15 years later assuming you win a deputy leadership contest and then a general election.

Nah, forget all that. Most mysterious is the fact that you don’t understand what a married couple is.

Nope, still not plumbed the deepest depth yet.

You also don’t understand the concept of a deposit on a mortgage.

You obviously have never taken out a mortgage.

Promo incoming in 3, 2, 1…

This is the same party that has a business secretary who openly misrepresented himself as a solicitor both online and in Parliament. What happened? Nothing.

Peter Fernando

All this news about politicians distract us from the complete waste of spaces people like Rayner,Farage,Corbyn Thatcher etc are. The fact that we can comment makes us feel we have democracy. we do not and sooner we realise that the better.

Equally as concerned

Only problems is we have lots of evidence of multiple other MPs doing dubious/ unethical stuff and none left

Smiths’ Shoes

Not round ‘ere partner!

John holm

Advice is given. You don’t have to accept it. ! Sweet home

Christinewibberley@christinewibberley.co.uk

The advice was to take advice!

Carol

She keeps lying and digging a deeper hole. Starmer is all for upholding the law when it comes to the EU but what about in this country and his cohorts in his team. Are we being governed by a bunch of liars

Tom

They all work on the rule that tomorrow all will be forgotten….so there is really no need to hang their head in shame

I have read a book about our wars especially the 2nd world war when many people, be they soldiers, farmers, house wives, doctors nurses … the list is endless and they all say that they had all been let down,trodden on and any hope had been taken away. …I wonder what they would all say now …..

Anonymous

I think she should resign.

Jones Day Open Evening Canapé Glutton

Labour will likely have to raise taxes to close the fiscal black hole we keep hearing about, as they have been unable to cut spending. Unless Rayner resigns, they will look hypocritical. If you are a senior politician, you shouldn’t be seeking tax efficiencies anyway in my opinion.

Voted Labour last time

With many socialists it’s “do as I say, don’t do as I do”.

With a housing crisis and the cost of homes being pushed up by people hoarding property that they don’t need,
why on earth should we be taking lessons from this bunch of morons?

At least the Tories don’t claim to be against wealth and privilege.

Strangeworld

Seems strange that u would buy a flat in Hove, on the south coast, which is possibly as far away from Manchester,England as u can get when u r co-parenting!

Reputable Trainee

I don’t understand how AR ended up in this situation tbh. We know now she did seek tax advice separate from the conveyancing. How, seriously, could her tax advisor have missed this? Whether or not the law is complicated (it’s not that complicated as made out), her circumstances are so in your face that it would require any sort of competent advisor to satisfy themselves of the correctness of their advice simply by applying the facts. And if they can’t do this, it should be flagged for more “expert” advice. Even simply by being associated with another property in the UK should have triggered the relevant legal review of whether or not her circumstances amounted to ownership for SDLT purposes.

Diane Abbott's Shoes

So her political career went up in flames over £40,000. That’s remarkably cheap

Join the conversation