Lady Nina Bracewell-Smith of Monaco

Here’s a piece from The Times a few weeks ago, just for your interest. Our old mate Lady Nina Bracewell-Smith, former director of Arsenal Football Club, the first and only female and probably the first person of non-British origin ever to sit on the Arsenal Board, has upped sticks and gone to live in Monaco. Coincidentally this happened just in time for her to avoid paying £34m tax on the £116m she got from Stan Kroenke for her – well, her husband’s really – approximately 16 per cent stake in Arsenal.

Monaco attracts some dodgy characters. I believe Harry Redknapp once visited while looking for a cashpoint or taking the dog for a walk or something. But that aside, it is obviously, OBVIOUSLY, a coincidence that she decided to move there just in time to not pay tax, and in no way is she a tax dodger or prone to immorality in her financial affairs. I am certain about that. Anyway, read the piece for yourself and come to your own conclusion.Lady Nina tax

Now, any questions from that?

Q: Is Lady Nina a tax dodger?

A: No, of course not. Tax avoider at worst.

Q: Is she though?

A: NO! She’s done nothing illegal. She just fancied moving to somewhere warmer.

Q: Is she though?

A: Didn’t you read the article? She was concerned that she should mitigate her tax liability by lawful means.

Q: She has since said that she regrets selling to Kroenke. How much does she regret it?

A: I don’t know. Apparently not enough to do some good with the money, like bail out Fanshare or pay any of the £34m in tax to prop up the NHS.

Q: Does that make her a bad person?

A: Certainly not. How dare you suggest that. I’m speechless.

Q: So moving to Monaco is nothing to do with avoiding tax?

A: That’s what she says.

Q: Is it coincidence that Lady Nina Bracewell-Smith can be shortened to Lady Nina B-S?

A: You might say that, I could not possibly comment.


Twitter: @AngryOfN5


16 thoughts on “Lady Nina Bracewell-Smith of Monaco

  1. At the end of the day, if something is legal, blaming the people who take advantage of it is a moot point. It just highlights how messed up the global economy system is. I know and met very few people in my life that given the chance to avoid paying the state, especially in a legal way (lets not go into the illegal stuff) would not do so, and believe me its not just the rich people or big companies that don’t. Until society as a whole worldwide changes that, fingering the rich and famous for something the majority does is simply wrong.
    Needles to say i do not agree with what Lady Nina is doing I am simply pointing out the other side that most usually neglect to do so.

  2. Where does she say moving to Monaco is nothing to do with avoiding tax? Why wouldn’t you avoid tax if you can, certainly by lawful means, if it’s worthwhile doing so? Fizsman was a Swiss resident for much the same reason. Maybe we should be angry with him too?

  3. So, to sum up the drift of the article, we have here:
    – female
    – foreign
    – inherited wealth

    All of which =” witch”

    Then on top of that a tax-shy witch? Burn her at the stake. May I suggest the latter sentence as a better title for this blog entry?

    Better yet start up an anti witch fund. I’m sure that Fisman descendants in….Switzerland along with the vast offshore holding of Usmanov, Kroenke and Dein, will be good targets to seek donations from.

    • a) Why are you assuming I have anything against her because she is female or foreign?
      b) I don’t believe she’s inherited any wealth, certainly not much.
      Just out of interest, what country do you reside in?

      • Without wishing to interrupt this exchange, but as a neutral observer, I’m inclined to think that you considered the fact Lady Nina is female (as though her name might not have been enough to safely come to that conclusion) and foreign significant enough to make a point of both, along with the mocking tone of the rest of your piece, might give the impression that you thought neither added a positive aspect. At the same time you can hardly claim you don’t believe she has inherited much wealth while claiming the £116m she received from Kroenke was really her husband’s!

      • Last time I checked her husband was still alive.
        The points about female and foreign were in relation to the Arsenal Board – if anything it’s a reflection of their lack of diversity over the years.

  4. At the same time as you were checking whether Lady Nina’s husband was still alive you could also have been checking that inherit can simply mean to pass on or succeed to something. It doesn’t require her husband’s death to inherit the shares that he inherited through his predecessors just as it doesn’t require your parent’s death for you to inherit their genes for example.

  5. Why are we off on red herrings about definitions of inheritance? The article is about tax avoidance. Which is hard to understand why this woman is singled out for tax avoidance.

    When you look at the recent history of Arsenal ownership, this entire class of people avoids tax. All of them. They avoid tax on personal taxes, they avoid it on business transactions – I mean what do you think commodity traders do? Pay 50% on everything. Or do you think they do this stuff out of Swiss and Bermudan corporations for sporting reasons? Get real man.

    If you want to name your favorite person to own Arsenal, well all of them avoid tax too.

    I’m all for decrying tax avoidance. But why single out the little brown lady who happened to elbow her way into a room full of generations and generations of white men who all avoid tax. Curious…..


    • Oh give it a rest. As soon as a paper I read puts out a story about another Arsenal director I’ll post that. As I did fairly recently about David Dein, if you’d like to check.

  6. Not silly at all Phil – just accurate. I feel it typifies just such a tendency for you to misunderstand your own arguments which contributes to your anger. Similarly you convinced yourself that Lady Nina has said moving to Monaco has nothing to do with saving tax when she didn’t – at least not in anything you’ve posted here. All small matters in the scale of things I agree but enough it seems for you to get angry about. Take a distance and the time to understand that your perspective is too often obscured by a red mist and maybe you’d be able to make a few Happyofislington posts. You must be happy sometimes surely? It would be nice to see that side of you. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.