CGT PRR on BTL

[Deleted User]

Jeremy535897 said:

[Deleted User] said:

SXX said:

Jeremy535897 said:

The cost of the extension to the lease should be allowable unless there is less than 50 years to run (as extended) when you sell (unlikely to be a problem I suspect).

I would claim the damp proof course as well, although if it were a replacement of a previously failed one, the matter is not free from doubt.

The lease has around 154 years unexpired since extending.   No the flat did not have a damp proof course when I bought it.  Can I also claim for the decorating as a result of the damp proof course?   The walls needed to be repainted after the damp proof course  and kitchen and bathroom units had to be taken off for the damp proof course and  then refitted?  (I would not have to do any these works if I did not have to put in a damp proof course).

Did you claim any of these expenses against your rental income when completing your tax returns?

OP did the damp proof work when acquiring the property, so I assumed not. If the damp proof course is an improvement, in my opinion the associated building and decorating work costs form part of it. 

Yes - I am aware and was hoping that the op hadn’t claimed as revenue expenses, as now confirmed.