Principal private residence

Principal private residence

Didn't find your answer?

This is not my area of expertise, I am enquiring because it relates to a family member.

Bob and Adele are not married. Adele mainly lives in Scotland, Bob mainly lives in Wales. Due to Bobs work he meets Adele they fall in love and he mainly sees her every other weekend, or they go away together.

This has continued for 6 years.

They decide to get married, but will continue with their current living arrangements, as they are happy with that.

Not your A-typical married life, but then everyone is different.

I have looked into the legislation and I believe as a married couple they cannot continue to have 2 principle private residences, is that correct? even in this type of circumstance. It seems very archaic in this day and age.

Once married they have to elect to have 1 of their homes as the PPR and the other if it was ever sold would be subject to CGT. 

Replies (13)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By FactChecker
28th Jan 2024 13:34

The only question appears to be:
"I have looked into the legislation and I believe as a married couple they cannot continue to have 2 principle private residences, is that correct?"
... to which the answer is Yes.

It sounds like they have a decision to make ... get married (and make an election), or continue as they are (unmarried).
Whether that is archaic is not relevant to facts of law - although it is a valid perception (as is the view held by some that marriage is an archaic institution)!

Thanks (3)
Replying to FactChecker:
braken
By sarahJR
28th Jan 2024 15:20

Thank you very much Fact checker, that was what i thought, but sometimes you just need clarification from someone else.

I suppose if you really think about it alot of law is archaic :-)
And marriage is definitely something alot of the younger generation are not doing. I personally like all my family having the same name, as to whether it is archaic or not, i have seen it so many times that people assume someone is Mrs X same name as their child, instead of Miss Y.

From the house perspective it really boils down to the future and whether when they both retire they then move in together and sell.
Tax wise they would clearly be better off single.
I will have to have the chat.

Thanks again you were most helpful

Thanks (1)
Replying to sarahJR:
Avatar
By I'msorryIhaven'taclue
28th Jan 2024 16:26

sarahJR wrote:

Tax wise they would clearly be better off single.

I will have to have the chat.

The trouble with trying to talk them out of marriage for tax reasons is that they'll resent you for it. They have the hots for one another... offer your congratulations, and don't forget to send a wedding card.

They might well be better off tax-wise in the short term by remaining single, but when one of them pops their clogs the survivor will inherit the other's assets free of tax and be able to live out their days comfortably. There's a certain reassurance in that for us oldies.

sarahJR wrote:

Thanks again you were most helpful

So FC's your Man of the Match?

Now you've hurt everyone's feelings! Especially David's.

Thanks (1)
Replying to I'msorryIhaven'taclue:
braken
By sarahJR
28th Jan 2024 18:38

You are quite right, I don't think I will be talking anyone out of marriage. If he wants to get married then he will have set his mind on it no matter what the tax implications.
But i will let him know anyway.

And as you say, I suppose if they pop their clogs after a long and enjoyable life, it falls under inheritance tax instead.

FC answered, David sent me a link, lol what can i say. David will never send me another link again eek!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By David Ex
28th Jan 2024 14:34

sarahJR wrote:

I have looked into the legislation and I believe as a married couple they cannot continue to have 2 principle private residences, is that correct? even in this type of circumstance. It seems very archaic in this day and age.

 

Also archaic: giving people extra tax relief for getting married.

Thanks (2)
Replying to David Ex:
braken
By sarahJR
28th Jan 2024 15:27

Thanks David
for your 2 replies, not the greatest of help.

If only they actually GAVE people extra relief for getting married. As per your statement.
Being Married I do not get the married couples relief, as you only get it if you are staying at home looking after the kids and earning effectively nothing. I suppose to encourage good homes, who knows.
So I think you will find for the majority of married couples these days, worthless.

Thanks (0)
Replying to sarahJR:
avatar
By David Ex
28th Jan 2024 16:08

sarahJR wrote:

Thanks David
for your 2 replies, not the greatest of help.

So the link I gave you to the HMRC CGT manual on the very point you asked about wasn’t helpful? Rightho. Won’t bother replying to any future questions you post.

Thanks (1)
Replying to David Ex:
braken
By sarahJR
28th Jan 2024 18:30

I had already read it, but thanks. I just wanted a yes you are correct in your assumptions. I would put a smiley emoji, but it doesnt like it.

Thanks (0)
DougScott
By Dougscott
28th Jan 2024 16:04

Well as someone who is seperated but still married then I believe/hope HMRC treat us as seperate for PPR and tax.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Matrix
28th Jan 2024 18:56

sarahJR wrote:

This is not my area of expertise

Out of interest, what is your area of expertise?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Matrix:
braken
By sarahJR
28th Jan 2024 20:24

General sole traders / partnership / small limited companies.
And associated work

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Montrose
07th Feb 2024 17:45

TCGA s222(6) addresses the point if no election is made under s222(5)(a).
There is no clear moment from which the two year period mentioned in S222(5)(a) applies set out in the legislation
See https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/capital-gains-manual/cg64525 for HMRC's's view

Thanks (0)