We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Tricky stamp duty question
princeofpounds
Posts: 10,396 Forumite
A friend of mine asked me a question about the new stamp duty rules, and I have to say I didn't have a clue what the answer was; throwing it out to the forum to see if anyone knows.
He owns one property outright where he lives, and jointly owns another property (with his father), with a 50% share of the latter.
His father is thinking of selling the remaining 50% share in the property to him.
But he is wondering if he will be caught by the higher stamp duty that has recently been brought in for second properties. After all, he already owns the property, just not fully.
Anyone got a clue?
Does it matter if they are joint tenants or tenants in common at all? (I don't know which they are currently)
He owns one property outright where he lives, and jointly owns another property (with his father), with a 50% share of the latter.
His father is thinking of selling the remaining 50% share in the property to him.
But he is wondering if he will be caught by the higher stamp duty that has recently been brought in for second properties. After all, he already owns the property, just not fully.
Anyone got a clue?
Does it matter if they are joint tenants or tenants in common at all? (I don't know which they are currently)
0
Comments
-
Unhelpful to you but I doubt osborne knows.
New rule. A chancellor should only bring in tax changes they can answer Q&As over for 2 hours."enough is a feast"...old Buddist proverb0 -
No answers available yet on the details as they are still consulting before putting it through Parliament (though my best guess would be that it would count as a second property - SDLT only payable on the price though, not the value of the whole property).0
-
Think about it for a minute.Unhelpful to you but I doubt osborne knows.
New rule. A chancellor should only bring in tax changes they can answer Q&As over for 2 hours.
Until the change is announced, nobody knows anything about it. There are inevitably consultations before the legislation is finalised and put into play. How can the real world be consulted, if nobody knows anything about the existence?
THAT's why there's always grey areas immediately after the announcements - because the legislation isn't finalised. It will only be finalised after consultation.0 -
Think about it for a minute.
Until the change is announced, nobody knows anything about it. There are inevitably consultations before the legislation is finalised and put into play. How can the real world be consulted, if nobody knows anything about the existence?
THAT's why there's always grey areas immediately after the announcements - because the legislation isn't finalised. It will only be finalised after consultation.
I would think he would consult first as they do on many other things and at least have it in the manifesto of an election lass than 6-months ago."enough is a feast"...old Buddist proverb0 -
I would think he would consult first as they do on many other things and at least have it in the manifesto of an election lass than 6-months ago.
He announced that there would be a consultation before legislating - that's what's happening. Obviously they can't consult in secret. (and the Autumn Statement was more than 6 months after the election)0 -
Thanks, ok seems I won't be able to say much for now. I thought it would be straightforward when I first considered it, but it's clearly not.0
-
You say "recently brought in", but that's incorrect, it hasn't started yet. Surely the obvious answer is to do the transaction in the period before the new higher rate is introduced so that whether it applies or not under the new rules (whatever they will be) is irrelevant.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards