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.
PPR and couple cohabiting
Comments
-
Principal private residence relief is a matter of fact. It is where the owner lives that matters.If the couple are living together in the same house, it is that property which qualifies. Many believe that, because they own only one property they are entitled to PPR relief whether they live in it or not.0
-
If you are married or in a civil partnership (and not separated) my understanding is you are only allowed one principal residence between you.
But a banker, engaged at enormous expense,Had the whole of their cash in his care.
Lewis Carroll0 -
That is correct. People who cohabit without being married or in a civil partnership can have two properties as main residences, but the gains could only be fully covered by main residence relief where person A owned property A and lived in property A for some of the time as a residence, and person B owned property B and lived in property B for some of the time as a residence.0
-
I think that we are straying from the original scenario. Both properties are jointly owned and the joint owners live together.I can’t fathom how one of the joint owners could ‘nominate’ any other property as PPR.0
-
purdyoaten2 said:I think that we are straying from the original scenario. Both properties are jointly owned and the joint owners live together.I can’t fathom how one of the joint owners could ‘nominate’ any other property as PPR.
Jeremy is absolutely right. The tax efficient way for an unmarried couple is for each to own one house, live in both simultaneously, and for each person to nominate the property they own.
It is also perfectly feasible for an unmarried couple to jointly own 2 properties, live in both simultaneously and for them to nominate one property each, not exactly tax efficient but perfectly feasible.
0 -
Yes - and that happens frequently (two single persons owning a house each before deciding to live together). However, op has stated that he/she is married and theoretica seems to have provided the answer?jimmo said:purdyoaten2 said:I think that we are straying from the original scenario. Both properties are jointly owned and the joint owners live together.I can’t fathom how one of the joint owners could ‘nominate’ any other property as PPR.Jeremy is absolutely right. The tax efficient way for an unmarried couple is for each to own one house, live in both simultaneously, and for each person to nominate the property they own.
It is also perfectly feasible for an unmarried couple to jointly own 2 properties, live in both simultaneously and for them to nominate one property each, not exactly tax efficient but perfectly feasible.
0 -
The OP said living together as a married couple- might not mean actually married.0
-
Fair enough and a great point! Used to be very important when I was in HMRC - some very awkward telephone calls!sheramber said:The OP said living together as a married couple- might not mean actually married.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.1K Spending & Discounts
- 246.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.2K Life & Family
- 260.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards

