Can you delay stamp duty payment?

LAD917

I don't think the OP is being entirely unreasonable, given that they specifically targeted something chain-free to beat the stamp duty deadline.  Eight weeks is feasible for a chain-free property, even during Covid.  I just exchanged in six and completed in eight weeks, and we would've completed in the sixth week or possibly earlier if the stamp duty holiday expiration had remained 31/3.

Going this fast requires everyone to parallel track the steps v. the sequential order that many prefer (so that they don't lose money).  Within 24 hours of accepting the offer, the buyer had applied for the mortgage, booked surveys, and ordered searches.  Within 24 hours, I had sent the lease, protocol forms, and all correspondence from the management company over the past three years.  My info was better than the management pack, but I had also ordered the management pack as soon as serious negotiations started so that we had it 10 business days later.

If everyone was clear from the start that beating the stamp duty was the priority, and committed to spending the money upfront to do all of the due diligence in parallel, this should've been doable in eight weeks.

TBG01

rennes99 said:

Slithery said:

rennes99 said:

By the "you should have mitigated for it months ago" arguement, where was the cut off then?!  3 months? 5 months before?

Seeing as how the original cutoff was the end of March and average timescales are usually 3 months then if you didn't have a complete chain by the end of last year then you were already pushing it. You were at least 4 months too late.

What shoudl matter is the buyer has been incentivised by the incentive! It's not to the benefit fo anyone else other than the buyer! Not their solictiors, not the lender, not the broker, not the vendor.... but the buyer! They have decided to move and take action as they have been offered a stamp duty break..... so why is that up to everyone else to make it happen, other than the person paying the bloody tax int he first place?!

Because you're not qualified or experienced enough to handle a conveyancing transaction? By all means give it a go if you think it can be done quicker though.

saajan_12

rennes99 said:

OK maybe I should ask this. And without trying to instigate the debate of "chicken and egg" here.....
Why was the SDTL holiday introduced?
Answer: To stimulate the property market and thus economy at large, by giving people an incentive to move house.
- yes, the original holiday upto 31st March. After that point, the extension upto June/Sept were just to enable transactions to complete. If you chose to start at that point, then that's outside the intended purpose, so can't blame anyone else if your gamble doesn't pay off.  
Next question: why haven't the government made the benefit "non-payable" at time of instruction, rather than at "completion," because a rule based on instruction is very easy to abuse. I can 'instruct' solicitors on 100 properties in case I want to buy them years later. Tell them to do the minimum possible work while I decide. Completion can actually be proved, with money and titles changing hands, not just an email to a solicitor. 
with "completion" being a HUGELY variable measurement, depending largely on uncontrolable variables and at the mercy of a system that has been completely overloaded and overstressed by the very incentive it is seeking to meet and has been stimulated by!! - its not really that uncontrollable, You fully control whether or not you exchange. You haven't exchanged so if it gets too close, then you can always pull out. 

If made at instruction, there is the incentive to carry it through and complete! 
I can only deduce, they are playing two steps ahead here and are overstimulating the market so that many more rush into a purchase, and ore will be liable for SDTL once completed than will have otherwise been, all the while paying for solictiors, EA fees, new furniture etc pumping tax into the economy.  - well you're not liable for SDLT if you choose to pull out because you can't complete in time. Only cost is a bit of solicitor money - no EA (provided the vendors had sensible contracts), no new furniture (provided you don't buy things for a transaction that's not guaranteed to happen). The tax on £1000 of solicitor money isn't whats going to sway things. 
Why on earth is it not from "instruction," which is easily verified by converyancers? 

By the "you should have mitigated for it months ago" arguement, where was the cut off then?!  3 months? 5 months before?! Its too variable! - 3-6 months.. which is exactly why the extension was 3 months, with a partial extension for 6 months. Take the flip side, where is the cut off for when your instruction within the holiday should result in completion with no SDLT? 3 months? 5 months? 12 months? 5 years? Too variable!
It should be able to be benefited from at the point of offer accepted or instruction (i.e the point at which parties have taken the action and decision incentivised by the SDTL holiday as was it's purpose) , or at the very least "exchange" where it's legally bound to happen. - Exchange would make a difference of about a week on average, and all the due diligence is done by that point, so doesn't help for 99% of delays in agreeing contract, searches, contract, surveys, enquiries, etc etc. You can always bring completion forward to the same / next day rather than keeping a gap, so this is a lot of faff for next to no benefit. 

Instruction or even exchange would be impossible to implement, while completion is an actual legal transfer that happens. The initial holiday was to stimulate the economy. After that the extension was just to allow people already stimulated to complete. If you choose to start after that, that's your gamble and you're free to pull out. 

Gavin83

It’s not getting extended again. As others have pointed out it was for delayed cases, anyone offering this year should have expected not to make it. If this is a problem you’ll have to pull out.

Ultimately if you’d wanted it done quicker I’d have spoken directly to a solicitor, asked them to handle every step (instead of a paralegal) and got them to push and fast track it as much as possible. Of course you’d have paid a lot more for this service but it probably would have still been less than the stamp duty.

For the record we looked at a house in March and was told by the EA we’d never make the date. At least he was honest.

GDB2222

SpiderLegs said:

rennes99 said:

OK maybe I should ask this. And without trying to instigate the debate of "chicken and egg" here.....
Why was the SDTL holiday introduced?
Answer: To stimulate the property market and thus economy at large, by giving people an incentive to move house.
Next question: why haven't the government made the benefit "non-payable" at time of instruction, rather than at "completion," with "completion" being a HUGELY variable measurement, depending largely on uncontrolable variables and at the mercy of a system that has been completely overloaded and overstressed by the very incentive it is seeking to meet and has been stimulated by!!

If made at instruction, there is the incentive to carry it through and complete! 
I can only deduce, they are playing two steps ahead here and are overstimulating the market so that many more rush into a purchase, and ore will be liable for SDTL once completed than will have otherwise been, all the while paying for solictiors, EA fees, new furniture etc pumping tax into the economy. 
Why on earth is it not from "instruction," which is easily verified by converyancers? 

By the "you should have mitigated for it months ago" arguement, where was the cut off then?!  3 months? 5 months before?! Its too variable! It should be able to be benefited from at the point of offer accepted or instruction (i.e the point at which parties have taken the action and decision incentivised by the SDTL holiday as was it's purpose) , or at the very least "exchange" where it's legally bound to happen.

Feel free to sign the petition.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/581308
very close to getting a govt response now. Can’t wait to hear it.

The reply in Arkell v Pressdram?

Keswick1uk

SDLT is a tax. If they waive it on instruction, it will later be payable on instruction.  I don't think so!

As others say, the extension was to enable original deals to complete, not for new starters.