The storm around Angela Rayner’s tax affairs deepened after the law firm involved in her property purchase issued a striking statement distancing themselves from blame.
Verrico & Associates, the small Herne Bay conveyancing firm she used when buying her flat in Hove, said they had simply used HMRC’s own online calculator—based entirely on the details Rayner gave them.
Managing director Joanna Verrico was blunt: her team never provided tax or trust advice, and always tells clients to seek specialist guidance.
She insisted the firm acted “in good faith” and suggested they were being unfairly cast as scapegoats in a political row.
A Tearful Admission Meets a Firm Response
Earlier this week, Rayner gave an emotional interview where she claimed she had been misadvised on stamp duty, hinting her advisers were to blame for the £40,000 tax discrepancy.
But the conveyancers’ statement directly undermined that narrative, saying they had done nothing wrong and had followed procedure to the letter.
This clash has put Rayner in an even tougher position, with her critics arguing she is shifting responsibility instead of owning up to mistakes.
Keir Starmer’s Balancing Act
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has repeatedly refused to say whether Rayner will lose her job if she is found to have broken ministerial rules.
He insists the independent probe led by ethics adviser Sir Laurie Magnus should run its course, promising a quick and thorough review.
Despite the controversy, Starmer and senior Cabinet members, including Chancellor Rachel Reeves, have publicly expressed confidence in Rayner.
But the Prime Minister’s refusal to directly address whether he would sack his deputy has only fueled speculation about her future.
The Mounting Political Pressure
Rayner, who also serves as Housing Secretary, admitted she paid the standard rate of stamp duty on the Hove flat when she should have paid the higher rate for second homes.
She has since referred herself to the independent ethics adviser and promised to settle any outstanding payments with HMRC.
Still, critics both inside and outside Labour are questioning her credibility.
Former shadow chancellor Ed Balls said it was hypocritical for Rayner to demand resignations from others in the past while resisting calls to step down herself.
One Labour MP suggested she might survive the short term but warned her political image could be permanently damaged.
Reactions from Across the Political Spectrum
Reform UK’s Nigel Farage suggested Rayner was in “very deep trouble” and hinted her situation looked increasingly indefensible.
Meanwhile, Conservative figures like Sir Iain Duncan Smith and Party Chairman Kevin Hollinrake turned their fire on Starmer, accusing him of poor judgment in defending her so strongly while key details about her tax position were still emerging.
The Tories argue the public has been misled for weeks, with contradictory statements and delays in transparency.
They say Starmer’s promise of a government built on integrity is being tested by his handling of the crisis.
The Search for Clarity
Behind the scenes, Rayner sought fresh legal advice from a King’s Counsel, which reportedly contradicted earlier guidance.
She also applied to lift a court order preventing her from commenting fully on her tax affairs—a move that eventually allowed her to make a public admission that she underpaid.
While Rayner insists she made an honest mistake and is working to resolve it, her critics remain unconvinced.
For many, the bigger question now is whether her deputy role can survive the political fallout.
What Comes Next?
The independent report from Sir Laurie Magnus could land any day, potentially as soon as Friday.
Its findings will be crucial in determining whether Rayner holds onto her role or is forced out.
For now, Labour MPs are split—some rallying behind her, others privately admitting the scandal has tarnished her reputation.
Whether Rayner survives may depend not only on the official verdict but also on whether another slip emerges.
As one MP warned: if one more controversy hits, she risks becoming “a laughing stock.”