Share this content
7

Definition of home for the SRT

as above

Didn't find your answer?

Good morning

Would someone kindly confirm my reasoning as to what does or doesn't constitute a "home" for the Statutory Residence Test and split residence treatment?

An individual and his family come back to the UK in 2016-17 after a long period of non-residence. They stay for one month in the same hotel, then move into a relative's house for a couple of months, and finally move into a rented house (where they still live now). When does the individual start to have a home? 

Having read in details all the examples and record keeping set in the HMRC guidance I think he starts to have a home when he moves into rented accomodation (degree of permanence).

However reading the following made me wonder:

"Example A2: Mary comes back to the UK to take up employment after spending 3 years studying abroad. She has given up the tenancy on the flat she occupied abroad and moves into her parents’ house. Her parents’ house is her home."

 And in the record keeping part it states "the presence of spouse, partner or children".

I understand it's not an exact science but would appreciate any comment.

Many thanks

 

Replies (7)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By Duggimon
15th Sep 2017 11:24

Was the relative in the house they moved into after the hotel? If not then I would say that's when they have a home, if they were then I would agree it's when they rented the house.

This is an opinion though, I have no statutory reference precisely defining "home", that's just what I would be comfortable arguing if my logic were questioned.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Duggimon:
avatar
By Chipette
15th Sep 2017 11:28

Thanks, yes they lived there with the relatives.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Chipette:
By Duggimon
15th Sep 2017 11:38

Then I would see that as the same sort of thing as a hotel, albeit more convivial. Or less, depending on the relative.

Thanks (1)
Portia profile image
By Portia Nina Levin
15th Sep 2017 11:37

In the month that they are at the hotel they do not have a home.

When they moved into the relatives had they already found the rental property? or did they find it subsequently? if so what would have happened if they had taken longer to find something?

I'd suggest that there was sufficient permanence with the relative's house (2 whole months, 1/6th of a year), particularly if they would have remained there longer had it taken longer to find suitable rented accommodation.

Why didn't they go straight into the relative's house when they arrived though?

The presence or absence of the relative is irrelevant.

How close a relative is the relative?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Portia Nina Levin:
avatar
By Chipette
15th Sep 2017 11:49

The relatives are his parents.
I believe the hotel was paid for by the ex employer but will check.
The individual has been looking for employment since their return, and didn't want to commit to a place until then.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Chipette:
Portia profile image
By Portia Nina Levin
15th Sep 2017 12:02

Then I'd say that the parents home was a home, and was available from when they arrived, albeit that it initially suited everybody better to take advantage of the ex-employer's hotel offering.

Thanks (3)
Replying to Portia Nina Levin:
avatar
By Chipette
15th Sep 2017 12:06

Thanks for your help.

Thanks (0)
Share this content

Related posts