Transcription
[Music] Oh, how do I even begin this video? I mean, it's not even a laughing matter, but I'm laughing because if you don't laugh, you're going to cry. God, we have to talk about Angela Raina.
Now, I keep forgetting that Angela Raina is the deputy prime minister of this country. I keep forgetting that, which makes what we're talking about here even worse. Even worse. Now, you've been paying attention to the news. This was an article this week or back end of last week. She's bought a house on the seafront in Brighton for £800,000. Okay, not necessarily I wouldn't say controversial that she's actually done that because people buy properties all the time, but because of who she is and the state that the country finds itself in and the measures the Labor government are considering to fill the 40 billion pound black hole that we have, her buying an £800,000 property in Brighton is in the media because of everything that is going on right now. Right. But that's not the story today. The story today is this. She dodges £40,000 in stamp duty tax by using a loophole. And we're going to talk about how she's managed to do this in this video. Honestly, this is gymnastics. And the big question for the video is this. Is this an abuse of the system or a fair use of the system? Please bear that in mind.
And what I don't want to do is I don't want this video to end on a negative. So, I'm going to try and end this video on a positive note because I think that there is or at least I'm going to try to put forth a positive case not on her side but on our side as normal people, right? Because I think there is a key lesson for us to learn. So, look, if you do get value from this video, please consider subscribing and hitting that notification bell. You get notified when I upload videos like this. But, as always, we're going to go through the articles. I'm going to do a bit of a scribe to explain how she's managed to do this. It's quite interesting. It really, really is.
So, let's just jump straight into the article here. Right. So the deputy prime minister is understood to have removed her name from the deeds of her house in Great Manchester a few weeks before buying a £800,000 seaside flat in Hoveve, East Sussex. She's removed herself, her name off the deeds of that property in Greater Manchester. It's actually in um Ashton underline. Now, it goes on to say here, the changes enabled Miss Raina to avoid paying £70,000 in stamp duty, which would have been applicable if Hoveve was her second home. Instead, she is thought to have paid £30,000 in stamp duty, saving her £40,000 in the process. Goes on to say, "Although the changes are entirely legal, the arrangements will raise questions over whether she has deliberately conducted her property affairs to pay less stamp duty and cancel tax." Operative words here. It is entirely legal.
And I think this is what she's going to hang her coat on, that she hasn't broken the rules. She hasn't broken the law. But from a moral standpoint, and you know, trying to argue this from a moral standpoint, I think is what everyone's go-to position is. And I think it is a fair argument. But what I found working in my career, particularly working with wealthy people, is that sometimes, a lot of the times, the moral standpoint doesn't even come into the equation when you treat things as a business transaction, as a financial transaction. And this right here, what she's done is a financial transaction. So moral and morality doesn't really come into it. And this is where I think a lot of people are going to be pissed, right? Because morally, how can it be right that you, the deputy prime minister of the UK, who is in lock step with the prime minister, Rachel Reeves, the chancellor of the exchequer, in trying to plug the 40 billion pound black hole that we face and in the autumn exploring every option under the sun to try and fill that gap by taxing the population, the middle class, the upper class, how can you justify this type of action and save yourself £40,000 on stamp duty, flouncing the rules or using loopholes to get around the rules and think that this isn't going to be a conversation where you're going to be criticized and there's going to be some scrutiny? I mean, wow. The hypocrisy is freaking mad. And forgive the language, but we have to call a spade a spade here.
Right now, let's let's get into how she's actually done this because this is really, really interesting. Let's go on to this page right here. All right. As you know, I like describe in these style of videos. And hopefully my pencil's not run out. So, currently she's got three properties. She owns three properties. Now, own is probably a loose word, but her main residence in Manchester, Ashton on the line, is the one where she basically removed her name from the deeds. Now, I wasn't even sure that that was something that you could do. If you own the property, your name is on the deeds of the property. I wasn't aware that you could remove your name from the deeds and still retain ownership of the property. But that's what she's been able to do. So by removing her name of the pro of the deeds of this property, it means that this property in Manchester is now no longer her main residence. So what she's now done, and this is the house in Brighton that she's bought, the flat in Brighton that she's bought for £800,000. She's made this one her main residence. And that basically means that the stamp duty that she would have paid on this being her second home is no longer at the levels that it should be because it's now being regarded as her main residence. So effectively, she's made this her main residence and now she's made a Manchester home her second residence, but she's already bought and already owns the Manchester property. So doesn't have to go and pay stamp duty in a backdated fashion because that's not how the rules work.
Now you're seeing this house in the middle right here. This is the ministerial house where she lives. Now, here's a bit of I guess semantics because technically speaking, she lives here most of the time when she's obviously in the role being the deputy prime minister of the UK. She lives here. Arguably, this is her main residence, but obviously it's not in her name. The government pays for everything to do with this property here. Counter tax, the whole shebang. The government. Well, I say the government, we pay for it as taxpayers, right? So, effectively, this is just a free home for her to live in while she's deputy prime minister. This is a new asset that she bought to help build wealth. Now, this isn't a rental property. I suppose that's probably one of the good things that you could kind of I don't know if it's good. I'm stretching here, guys. I'm stretching because again, I don't want this to be a negative like video. I don't want to go after her as a person and we'll talk a little bit about about why that is the case in a moment, right? But a second home is not a rental property. She's not and she is kind of taking like homes out of stock because she's now has a second home, right? But my god, I can't justify this. Anyway, you get what I'm saying? She now has two properties and she has used loopholes in the rules to be able to effectively reduce the stamp duty that she has been able to pay by simply removing her name from the deeds on her main property or what was her main property in Greater Manchester.
Now the question is right, when would you and I ever be in a position without the right type of advice be in a position where we would understand that this is how it actually works? When because let's be honest, a lot of people are reluctant to take advice from professionals in this type of regard because of the kind of cost and this kind of leads us to where I really want to steer this conversation and I want to say this and I don't want to get shot. So, please don't shoot the messenger when I say this, but I'm saying this purely based on my experience of working with these type of people. They have access to services that ordinary people don't have. And because they have access to these services and they're willing to pay good money for these services, they are able to explore and exploit loopholes because they're in a position to do so. And fundamentally, when you when you get to the, you know, these type of articles, right, not this one, this first one right here, when you hear her, you know, buying a £800,000 property, the reaction that I got on Instagram was, well, how can she afford that? What's the deputy prime minister's salary? How can she afford a £800,000 home? And my response was, they all have side incomes. They all have side money coming in from different locations. But the point that I want to make here is she does not, in any stretch of the imagination, feel the pain that everybody else feels in the country. Lower class, middle class, the squeeze on the middle class. If you're earning £100,000 and you don't feel like you're well off, she doesn't feel that. She does not feel that at all. That is not the face of a woman who is under financial pressure in any way, shape, or form because she's not under financial pressure.
And I think when you explore topics like this where she is buying property worth £800,000, it's very, very easy to be angry at that. How can she afford it? You know, she's going against their own rules and it's one rule for them, one rule for us. I ask people not to be annoyed at these types of things purely because fundamentally, when you really boil down to what's going on, you're dealing with human conditioning and since the beginning of time. Now, her background supposedly is from a very humble background. She's from a working-class background, right? So she's got herself through, I would imagine, hard work to the position where she is deputy prime minister. She is like anyone coming from a poor background. You get to a place, you want to acquire assets. And whilst we can be as annoyed and angry as we want to be about her acquiring assets, this is what people do when they ascend financially. The only way in which you are able to build wealth is by acquiring assets. That's what she's doing. It just so happens that she is deputy prime minister of the UK. Her saving money on stamp duty is within the legal rules. Yes, it is questionable. Yes, you could say it's exploitative. It's an abuse of the system because of who she is. But if you take away her role, this is stuff that anyone in her caliber, at her echelon of earnings and standing in society would be doing as a function of being financially prudent. And I know that this may be really difficult for some people to hear, but that's just the reality of it. I'm not going to be a hypocrite and sit here and say that I wouldn't do the same thing if I had the opportunity to because I probably would. Because at the end of the day, given everything we've been speaking about on this channel for the past two weeks, inheritance tax, capital gains tax, what are we all here for? Most of us are here because we want to build a lifestyle that will not only just support us, but gives those of us that we leave behind, family behind, the best start possible. It's why people acquire wealth. It's why people buy assets to appreciate in the future, to fund their lifestyle now, to fund retirement, and hopefully have something to leave to their kids. This is all part of the course. This is all part of the financial landscape and the things that you do to be prudent in the financial landscape. What she's done is she's exploited, she's explored, and she's exploited the rules as they currently sit.
Another point I guess uh or case that I can reference that was very similar to this was Rishi Sunak's wife not paying tax because she paid a fee to HMRC. I remember when that was a thing on social media, everyone was outraged and, you know, maybe rightly so. But when asked on my poll on Instagram, would you do the same thing? 98% of people said yes, I would do the same thing if I could pay a fee to HMRC so I didn't have to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds on tax. 98% of people said that they would do just that. And I would poll, maybe I might do this on Instagram and I might do this in the community section, right? If you were in the same position where you could buy a house and you knew that you could take your name off the deeds of your primary residence and put it on the second house that you're buying, knowing that you're not going to be renting it out and save yourself £40,000 of stamp duty, would you do it? Would you do it? If you're honest with yourself, would you do it? Cuz I would. I would guess that most people would.
Now, are we right to be angry? Are we right to be frustrated? I believe so. Because at the end of the day, Rachel Reeves is going to stand up there in October at the autumn statement and she is going to deliver tax increases that are going to impact lower class, middle class, and even people that are earning well, and the money isn't going far enough. She is going to announce stuff that is going to hurt your wallet personally. But here's the news. No one is coming to save you. And so all the things that I talk about here on the channel about being financially responsible, making sure that you have, you know, really good controls over your finances so you understand what's coming in and going out and making use, making the best use, the most efficient, optimal use of the of the finances that you're earning right now to build for the future. That conversation is even more important now because guess what, ladies and gents, that's exactly what she's doing. She's doing exactly that. She's putting her money to work in assets that are going to appreciate in value that will build her net worth. Coming from a working-class background, if it's good enough for her, why is it not good enough for you?
And what we are not seeing right now is because we are seeing her buy property. What we are not seeing right now is whether she's actually investing in companies, investing in the stock market. That's not where not that's what we're not seeing. But if you talk about investing here on the channel, there's still a lot of skepticism, a lot of distrust in investing in the stock market because of the risk. And yes, there is risk. Yes, at certain stages of life, you should not be looking at investing, particularly if you maybe want income. Maybe it might not be the right thing for you, but it could also be the right thing for you. If you are young, this is something, investing is definitely something you should be looking at because guess what? It's not just her. Every single one of them in parliament are doing this right now. All of them are. They'll be investing. They'll be putting money into assets. All of these political leaders as they joust and fight for your vote with all kinds of like headlines and rhetoric that we're seeing across the media right now. All of them, all of them have assets, have put their money into assets, are putting their money into assets. That's what you need to be doing because that is the only way that you're going to be able to insulate yourself for the future.
I said I wanted to end this on like a positive note and not finger point because I'm a firm believer that ultimately we are the masters of our own destiny. We're the captain of our own ships. We can we can look at what the government is going to do and we can complain all we want. We can be frustrated all we want. It's not going to change anything unless we do something. And when I say change anything, I mean your own, our own personal finances. It will change things in terms of it might get worse and it might get tighter, but that does not mean we don't have the autonomy and the power to make better financial decisions and find out the things that we can proactively do to ensure that we're able to build for the future. And you're not going to be able to do that at certain levels. If you're struggling with debt, then yes, that's a massive freaking issue. Of course it is. If you're not earning enough money, yes, that's an issue. You're going to have to find a way to streamline your debt. I do workshops. I talk about this stuff all the time. That's the stuff that does not get traction on YouTube. Unfortunately, unfortunately, it does not get traction on YouTube. Talking about topics like this does because it's in the public domain. It's of interest, which is why it's important that we have these type of conversations in the midst of this type of content. We have control. We need not easily relinquish the control that we have over our own decisions and our own influence over our own situation. And I know people will say, "Oh, you know, Pete, that's easy for you to say, you live in Dubai and blah blah blah blah blah." But I used to be homeless. I have also come from a very poor background. It takes work. It takes determination. It takes being discerning around the choices that you make. I've had to make some very, very difficult choices, especially around my spending. I learned the hard way. I struggled with debt for 10, 15 years. I came out of that. That's allowed me to be in a position where I can build financially. I want that for everyone else who's watching this.
And so, look, I just want to leave this video on the note of yes, look, she's probably abusing the system, but she's using the legal framework. Is it really abuse? We can be upset all we want and it is outrageous that she does it because she's the deputy prime minister. But again, we're dealing with human beings at the end of the day. This is human nature, unfortunately. Should she lead by example? Yeah, she should. But when it comes to people's finances, it is very, very hard to lead by example when your finances are on the line. And that's just the truth. Please look at these types of things about what can I learn from this? And what I've learned from this is you can have a property. You can have a property and you can remove your name from the deeds of that property, retain ownership, buy another property, and save yourself £40,000 on stamp duty. That's what I've learned in this video. What did you learn? What are your thoughts? Let me know in the comments section down below. Don't forget to drop a like if you did enjoy it and leave your thoughts down below. And again, if you've not subscribed, please consider subscribing. I'll catch you in the next one. Cheers.