Client is in work related accomodation and is selling a rental property which (could be, of course its not yet) deemend as their PPR for CGT purposes and buying another one more suitable for them in the longer term.
There is no immediate intention to occupy the new property due to work related accomodation
Poking around the SDLT manual and legislation I cant seem any equivalent deeming provisions for CGT with which I am familiar.
This is the only section i can find with HMRC's view is SDLT09812 which is silent on deeming but does state you must live there.
The legislation just says "the purchaser's only or main residence" under condition D without defining main residence other than the following section (6)
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/14/schedule/4ZA/part/2
Feeling I am looking for unicorns here, but is there just not an equivalent to the CGT side?
Replies (8)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
This looks like it might be worth a read:
https://www.blakemorgan.co.uk/stamp-duty-land-tax-3-surcharge-replacemen...
I confirm you looking for unicorns here and there is no similar/equivalent SDLT deeming rule to s222(8) TCGA 1992.
Why would you expect an "equivalent to the CGT side" (in terms of SDLT) ... they have unrelated objectives.
The former is intended to avoid discrimination of those who are forced to reside in work related accommodation for some years - and the latter is a disincentive to those buying more than one property (thereby prolonging an over-heated market).
Whether or not you agree with these objectives, they are quite distinct IMHO.
I quite agree that it's reasonable to ask ... I was just giving my opinion as to why the same logic hasn't been applied in both cases (essentially because logic doesn't come into it as we didn't start with a piece of blank paper - and different driving forces were applied by different people to each set of laws).
The same kind of lack of logic of course applies all over the place - e.g. the concept of 'employment status' in the hands of HMRC (IR35) or in the hands of HR lawyers.