The Labour Party has been accused of depriving taxpayers of hundreds of thousands of pounds in stamp duty in the sale of its London headquarters, despite the Chancellor’s clampdown on stamp duty avoidance schemes in his mini-budget last week.
The Independent on Sunday has learnt that Labour sold its Westminster headquarters this year using a specially created company. The device, which Labour insists is a normal commercial transaction, cost the Treasury about £210,000 in lost stamp duty.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Can “Manchesterism” work for our rural communities? (Ray Georgeson)
What would Keynes do? (Charlie Larkin)
Why Britain should be wary of Andy Burnham’s Devolution Revolution (Iain Donaldson)
“Build, baby, build” but don’t lower our ambitions on affordability (Victor Chamberlain)
Twenty-six years of evidence on drugs. Twenty-six years of cowardice. (Tanya Park)
Tastes change ~
Nine in ten paying more than necessary in Vehicle Excise Duty
A radical agenda but can Burnham deliver?
Reg Calvert and his boarding school of rock
A shocking abuse of the legal system where the rich try to bully the weak and poor into submission
The Joy of Six 1540
Are we doing enough to insure against climate change?
David Le Grice 
David Warren David Le Grice 
Ruth Bright 
Paul Turnbull 
3 Comments
We seem to have been posting in parallel – but there is a twist to this story.
http://www.liberalreview.com/content/2006/12/another-thing-tories-and-labour-have-in-common
I’m posting on a train! Wifi on a train! And it works! I’m so very excited…
A land law student writes:
We’ve just been taught that the Land Registration Act 2002 requires registration of the property with 2 months otherwise the transaction is void.
If the Independent report is correct that the sale took place at the end of August but the Land Registry still shows the owner as the Labour party then an interesting question springs to mind (this would be an issue for the purchaser rather than the Labour party admitedly and there might be some technical reasons I’m not aware of why these provisions don’t apply)