Hold over relief on gift of land.

Is this allowed?

Didn't find your answer?

Apologies if this is a straight forward question, I'm sure I know the answer to this but have an annoying seed of doubt that I'm hoping somebody out there can alleviate.

Client has a constuction company and builders merchants with a large commercial yard (including retail bulding for merchants).

Client wishes to gift land / buildings to son but not the shares in the company at this point.

As the yard has always been used exclusively for the purpose of the business, I believe said gift would be eligible for a gift relief claim.

My doubt revolves around the fact that there is no associated disposal of the shares.  I know I am probably just confusing the ER rules with the gift relief conditions but would appreciate it if somebody could confirm this.

Replies (8)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By mikefleming3028
12th Sep 2017 17:06

See Section 165 (2) (a) (11) TCGA1992 which covers your point. No other disposal is required.
You should also consider the IHT and CGT implications on the donor by reference to the future use of the property and the residence status of the done.

Thanks (2)
By Ruddles
12th Sep 2017 17:10

Who owns the assets? By inference it is the individual and not the company but it's not clear.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ruddles:
Portia profile image
By Portia Nina Levin
12th Sep 2017 17:15

Is it the OP's inference? or your implication?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Portia Nina Levin:
By Ruddles
12th Sep 2017 19:51

Neither of course. It is my inference from the implication in the OP's statement.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ruddles:
avatar
By Mr Trellis of N Wales
12th Sep 2017 18:33

To expand on your point Ruddles, accountants often moan that their flesh and blood clients fail to appreciate that their companies are separate legal persons. Here we have an accountant making the same error. Pound to a penny* the OP has two clients and has used the word ‘client’ indiscriminately and thus sowed confusion. If only perspicacity was more common.

*that is odds of 240:1.

Suggestion to OP: If counting clients is too hard, try counting the number of engagement letters sent instead.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Mr Trellis of N Wales:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
12th Sep 2017 18:36

Mr Trellis of N Wales wrote:

If counting clients is too hard, try counting the number of engagement letters sent instead.


We have at least a dozen per client*

*On average

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ruddles:
avatar
By dhughes1975
13th Sep 2017 12:03

Apologies, yes it is the individual that owns the land and buildings.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Tax Dragon
12th Sep 2017 18:31

I hope the driver for this is non-tax (eg to pass on a rental income stream).

If it's DIY tax 'planning', it may be misguided.

Thanks (0)