Richard Tice has been very clear that Angela Rayner cannot add up. This would carry more weight if his own companies had managed to get their corporation tax right.
Rayner’s offence is familiar enough. A muddle over council tax. Untidy, politically inconvenient, and easy to explain to anyone who has ever opened a local authority bill. It is precisely the sort of mistake that lends itself to moral outrage. Small, personal, and immediately comprehensible.
Tice has treated it as evidence of something larger. Not just an error, but a character flaw. Proof, we are invited to conclude, that Labour cannot be trusted with money.
At which point his own affairs rather intrude.
Richard Tice has been linked to a set of companies which appear to have underpaid corporation tax by around £100,000. The mechanism is not especially exotic. Income that should have been treated as taxable was instead handled as if it were tax free. Not a cunning piece of fiscal engineering. More a basic misunderstanding of how the rules apply.
That distinction matters. There is a long and tedious debate to be had about aggressive tax planning, loopholes, and the line between legal avoidance and something more dubious. This is not really that debate. This is closer to getting the sums wrong.
It is also not a one off. The issue appears across multiple companies in the same structure, all doing much the same thing in much the same way. One can make a mistake. Several entities all making the same mistake begins to look less like a slip and more like a system.
Tice’s response is that errors happen in business and can be corrected. That is true, as far as it goes. HMRC exists in part to tidy up after such things. But it does leave a slightly awkward contrast with the tone adopted towards Angela Rayner, where a single domestic error has been elevated into a general indictment of competence.
There is also the small matter of where the money goes. These companies sit within a wider structure that has channelled substantial funds into Reform UK. Which creates an unfortunate optic. Money that may not have been taxed as it should have been ends up helping to fund a political party that spends much of its time criticising others on fiscal responsibility.
None of this requires exaggeration. It is awkward enough as it stands.
What makes it more interesting is what it says about how these things are judged. A council tax error is politically lethal because everyone understands it. It is concrete. You can picture the bill, the envelope, the missed payment. It feels real.
Corporation tax, particularly when it involves property income and corporate structures, is different. It is opaque. Most people sensibly avoid thinking about it at all. Which makes it much easier to dismiss as a technicality, or to wrap in the reassuring language of “complex rules” and “professional advice”.
The result is a kind of asymmetry. Small mistakes that are easy to grasp become moral scandals. Larger ones that require a bit of explanation are treated as administrative footnotes.
Tice is hardly unique in this. It is a well established political habit. But he does illustrate it rather neatly.
If Angela Rayner’s council tax bill tells us something profound about Labour’s economic competence, then a set of companies misapplying basic tax rules might reasonably be thought to tell us something about Reform’s. If, on the other hand, one believes that these things are simply errors that can be corrected, then that principle ought to apply a little more consistently.
What does not really work is holding both positions at once.
In modern British politics, the test of economic credibility is not whether your numbers add up. It is whether your mistakes are simple enough for everyone else to understand.
No comments:
Post a Comment