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!

Complicated scenario

2»

Comments

  • poseidon1
    poseidon1 Posts: 3,738
    1,000 Posts Third Anniversary Name Dropper
    Forumite

    An interesting analysis of how proactive legal advice with full understanding of a client's circumstances could produce beneficial tax outcomes.

    However it is unlikely the OP would have known about the assent option herself if probate was obtained on a DIY basis. Even if a solicitor was involved, the usual 'tunnel vision' approach involved in winding up an estate ASAP, usually points to executor estate sales, rather than beneficiary sales unless CGT mitigation was a consideration.

  • mlz1413
    mlz1413 Posts: 3,216
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Forumite

    It sounds like OP hasn't owned their own home for number of years. So her main residence since Sep 2025, has been her partners home.

    So reading the below which is from GOV.UK / higher rates of SDLT, it seems that this would now be her main residence and hence higher rate SDLT would not apply.

    When the higher rates do not apply

    The higher rates do not apply to certain people, property and transactions.

    People

    Do not include anyone who will both:

    use your new property as their main home

    have sold or given away the last main home they owned before you buy your new home (or on the same day)

    I am no expert, just reading the website, so maybe the rules are more complicated.

    Surely if you are allowed to move main residence whilst owning a 2nd property, then this rule applies to the OP, as she has to have a main residence.

  • SDLT_Geek
    SDLT_Geek Posts: 3,071
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite

    That is not how the SDLT rules work! To be "replacing" your main residence it is not enough that you are moving home from one main residence to another. You have to "dispose" of your interest in a previous main residence.

    You cannot meet that test if you do not own (or have a share in) your main residence (though as an exception, the test can be met if a spouse / civil partner disposes of their interest in your main residence).

    If you are interested, the guidance here is fairly clear: https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/stamp-duty-land-tax-manual/sdltm09800

  • mlz1413
    mlz1413 Posts: 3,216
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Forumite

    There is alot to know! thanks for the link.

    So, if OP nevers owns a main residence again and just lives with her partner, wherever he lives, then it will never trigger higher SDLT?

    But to own again, what are the options?

    Buy an interest in partners house to give her a main residence again?

    marry?

    Or just sell the B2L and use proceeds to enhance pension (no idea if there is the equity for this, just adding as food for though)

  • _Penny_Dreadful
    _Penny_Dreadful Posts: 1,681
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    Forumite

    In this scenario the OP would either have to sell the BTL before jointly buying the new home with their partner or get married before jointly buying the home with their now spouse.

    The first option potentially triggers a CGT liability so a quick visit to the registry office with a couple of witnesses could be the least expensive option. Should I buy a hat?

★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 355.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 456.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 248.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 605.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 179K Life & Family
  • 263.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.