If Rayner goes, as many now think is likely, the question becomes who replaces her and what will she do next?published at 07:24 BST 5 September

07:24 BST 5 September

Chris Mason
Political editor

It feels like crunch time for Angela Rayner.

Plenty of folk at Westminster reckon today is the day her fate will be determined.

The prime minister told me yesterday he expected the investigation by the independent adviser on ministerial standards to be quick and he thought that was a good thing.

That suggests too that Keir Starmer won’t prevaricate in offering his own judgement about the report's findings once he himself has them.

As ever, there's always scope for unforeseen wrinkles or unrelated stuff that pushes things back a bit.

Does the prime minister want to do a wider reshuffle at the same time?

Aside from the timing, this is a "heads it's awkward, tails it's awkward" situation for the prime minister.

If the report leaves scope for the deputy prime minister to stay on, it’s not an easy argument to make after all the revelations of recent days.

But, as most I talk to now think is more likely, and she goes, there are then two big questions: who replaces her and what does she do next?

Does she remain deputy leader of the Labour Party, a position she was elected to by party members, even if she is no longer deputy prime minister and housing secretary?

If she resigns as the party’s deputy leader, a contest to replace her would begin.

When I spoke to Starmer in Glasgow on Thursday, he was talking up a £10bn deal to sell warships to Norway.

He talked with an enthusiasm about digital ID cards, as a potential tool for tackling illegal immigration, and about tweaks to the implications of the European Convention on Human Rights he’s determined to push through.

But all of this, inevitably, generates fewer headlines than the conduct of his deputy.

A report into the conduct of Angela Rayner, over the purchase of an £800,000 flat, could come as early as today.

The deputy PM has admitted to underpaying stamp duty on the property, but blamed the "error" on inadequate legal advice.

The timeline can be a bit confusing, but we've got a graphic here that should make things a little clearer.

• Read more on the timeline of the Angela Rayner flat row

Questions continue to swirl around the expert advice Angela Rayner says she received before buying an £800,000 flat in East Sussex.

What we know

In a lengthy and deeply personal statement, Rayner admitted to underpaying stamp duty on the property and said the "error" arose due to legal advice that didn't "properly take account" of her complex situation, which involved a trust set up for her son with special educational needs.

Allies of Rayner say she received advice from a conveyancer - now known to be Vericco & Associates - and from two other trust experts.

What we don't know

Rayner's team have refused to answer questions about who the two trust experts were - meaning we don't know whether they also have specialised knowledge of tax law, particularly around stamp duty.

We also don't know what level of information they had about the trust for her son.

Such questions are likely to be at the centre of the report by the prime minister's ethics adviser.

• Read more about the unanswered questions around the saga

As a reminder, here's the statement Deputy PM Angela Rayner put out on Wednesday about her tax affairs:

"Following the substantial scrutiny surrounding my living arrangements, I wanted to set out the facts as openly and transparently as I can.

"Until now, an undertaking in a court order prevented me from disclosing information about certain aspects of my personal life. In the interests of public transparency, I applied to the court and I was last night released from this undertaking.

"Family life can be complicated, and it is no secret that, like many families across the country, my domestic arrangements reflect these complexities. Throughout my career, I have always tried to be the best mum to my children, while managing the demanding realities of public service.

"There has been a lot of speculation in recent days about my domestic arrangements and in particular the home I share with my ex-husband and my family. While I do not find it easy to publicly discuss personal and sometimes distressing family matters, I have always taken my responsibility as an MP and Deputy Prime Minister seriously and tried to be as open as possible while protecting my family. To address the allegations made against me I have now taken the difficult decision to explain why my arrangements are as they are.

"In 2023 my ex-husband and I divorced. As parents who have been through divorce will understand, the top priority for both of us during that process was the wellbeing of our children and helping them navigate this change. To provide maximum stability during this transition, we agreed to a nesting arrangement where the children remain in the family home full-time while we alternate living there. We also wanted to ensure that our child, who has special educational needs, was provided for as part of the divorce settlement.

"A court-instructed trust was established in 2020 following a deeply personal and distressing incident involving my son as a premature baby. He was left with life-long disabilities, and the trust was established to manage the award on his behalf - a standard practice in circumstances like ours.

"To ensure he continued to have stability in the family home, which had been adapted for his needs, we agreed that our interest in the family home would be transferred to this court-instructed trust of which he is the sole beneficiary.

"Some of the interest in our family home was transferred to the trust in 2023. In January 2025, I sold the remaining interest in the property to my son’s trust. This will give him the security of knowing the home is his, allowing him to continue to live in the home he feels safe in and grew up in. We transferred the property because it was in the best interests of our child. I acted as any parent would.

"The sale of the property in Ashton-under-Lyne to the trust has not altered my family life. It remains my family home, as it has been for over a decade. It contains the majority of my possessions and it is where I am registered for most official and financial purposes ranging from credit cards to the dentist to the electoral roll. But most importantly, it is where my children live and have gone to school and now college, and where I regularly live while caring for them.

"After I sold my stake to the trust, I bought a property in Hove in May 2025 . Like many people, I used the lump sum from selling my stake in my Ashton home, which was the only property I owned and where my savings were, for the deposit on my new one. I obtained a mortgage to finance the rest.

"When purchasing the property my understanding, on advice from lawyers, was that my circumstances meant I was liable for the standard rate of stamp duty.

"However, given the recent allegations in the press I have subsequently sought further advice from a leading tax counsel to review that position and to ensure I am fully compliant with all tax provisions. I have now been advised that although I did not own any other property at the time of the purchase, the application of complex deeming provisions which relate to my son’s trust gives rise to additional stamp duty liabilities. I acknowledge that due to my reliance on advice from lawyers which did not properly take account of these provisions, I did not pay the appropriate stamp duty at the time of the purchase. I am working with expert lawyers and with HMRC to resolve the matter and pay what is due.

"The arrangements I have set out reflect the reality that family life is rarely straightforward, particularly when dealing with disability, divorce, and the complexities of ensuring your children’s long term security. Every decision I have made has been guided by what I believe to be in my children’s best interests.

"I deeply regret the error that has been made. I am committed to resolving this matter fully and providing the transparency that public service demands. It is for that reason I have today referred myself to the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards, and will provide him with my fullest cooperation and access to all the information he requires."

Helen Catt
Political correspondent

The conveyancing firm that worked on Angela Rayner's purchase of a flat in Hove in East Sussex has said it did not offer her tax advice.

Last night, the small family firm in Kent who did the conveyancing work for her, Verrico & Associates, released a statement which said it did not offer tax advice or deal with trusts. Its founder, Joanna Verrico, said the company had calculated the amount of stamp duty “based on the facts and information provided to us".

Allies of Angela Rayner had said she had taken advice from a conveyancer and two experts in trust law to determine how much stamp duty was due on the flat in Hove. The identity of the trust law experts is not known.

Rayner has claimed that her underpayment of stamp duty on the property was a "mistake" resulting from incorrect legal advice, which did not properly take account of her circumstances.

The Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards, Sir Laurie Magnus, is preparing a report, which some sources have suggested could come as soon as today.

Magnus is likely to assess whether or not Rayner took sufficient steps to secure appropriate legal advice - given the existence of a trust set up to benefit her son.

The prime minister has said he believes Magnus's report would be delivered quickly.

What's going on now? Sir Laurie Magnus, the prime minister's ethics adviser, is looking into whether Angela Rayner sought appropriate advice ahead of the purchase of her Hove flat and whether she provided enough information about her situation to those advising her.

When should we expect those findings? Soon appears to be the expectation of the government, with some sources telling us that unless something changes it will come today.

What will happen after the report lands? The PM has underlined that he will look "very carefully" at the report when it arrives, but has refused to commit to a course of action if Magnus finds the ministerial code has been broken by Rayner.

For now though, it's unlikely anything will move until the ethics adviser completes his work.

Chris Mason
Political editor

The prime minister has repeatedly refused to say if he will sack Rayner if his standards adviser concludes she broke the ministerial code.

Speaking to the BBC on Thursday, Sir Keir Starmer said he would "of course act" on Sir Laurie Magnus's report, which he expected to be "comprehensive" and delivered quickly, but would not be drawn on whether Rayner would be fired.

"I will look very carefully, as you would expect, to whatever report he puts in front of me," he said.

"There's a clear procedure, I strengthened that procedure, it is now taking place... and then of course I will act on whatever the report is that is put in front of me," he said.

The prime minister has the power to dismiss Rayner from her roles as housing secretary and deputy prime minister but cannot remove her as deputy Labour Party leader because she was elected to the role by Labour members.

Rayner's fate hangs in balance as PM awaits imminent reportpublished at 05:33 BST 5 September

05:33 BST 5 September

Chris Mason
Political editor

Just the other day, the prime minister sought to badge this autumn term as marking what he called the start of “phase two” of his premiership, with a focus on “delivery, delivery, delivery”, as he put it.

But today he finds himself awaiting the imminent delivery of his ethics adviser’s report on the conduct of his deputy.

Sir Laurie Magnus has a track record of punchy, pretty unambiguous conclusions about a minister’s conduct, often leaving the prime minister or the minister in question with few dots to join to determine their fate.

Boris Johnson once rejected the conclusions of a previous ethics adviser’s inquiry when it concluded the then-Home Secretary Priti Patel had broken the ministerial code. The adviser resigned.

In that context, Keir Starmer’s repeated equivocation yesterday about whether a breach of the ministerial code would be a sackable offence was striking. He argues he is following due process.

Stay with us for all the latest updates, news and analysis throughout the day.