Council Tax following death

A person in their capacity as executor is a different legal entity to their status as beneficiary.

For all practical purposes they are 2 different people

These are separate qualifying interests being an executor and a beneficiary should be kept independent of each other.

(2) the conditions referred to in paragraph (1) above are, subject to paragraph (3) below, that—
(a) the deceased had, at the date of his death, a freehold interest in the dwelling, or a leasehold interest in the dwelling which was granted for a term of six months or more, and
(i) no person a qualifying person in respect of the dwelling; or
(ii) a person is a qualifying person in respect of the dwelling acting in his capacity as executor or administrator, and no person is a qualifying person in any other capacity;

An executor can have 2 qualifying interests one as executor one as a beneficiary.

2.a.ii does not negate that.

In this case there would still be 3 other qualifying persons if you accept beneficial ownership transfers at DOD, at DOD it cannot be known if that is the case as there is an estate to administer.

For other tax legislation(eg. CGT) the interest is back dated if needed

getmore4less wrote: »

A person in their capacity as executor is a different legal entity to their status as beneficiary.

For all practical purposes they are 2 different people

These are separate qualifying interests being an executor and a beneficiary should be kept independent of each other.

In this case there would still be 3 other qualifying persons if you accept beneficial ownership transfers at DOD, at DOD it cannot be known if that is the case as there is an estate to administer.

For this purpose though 'qualifying person' is specifically defined in council tax legislation.

Class F recognises that an executor and a qualifying person may be the same individual.

The qualifying person would be a person who would ordinarily fall liable under council tax rules with the specific exception that they are not regarded as such for the point of 2(a)(ii) so long as they are also executors.

So, looking only from the date of probate (and the 6 month exemption from that point) there are 3 owners but 2 are also executors under 2(a)(ii. This removes them from consideration when looking at the Class F exemption however it then leaves the 1 owner who is not an executor but is a qualifying person, which prevents the exemption applying.


"qualifying person" means a person who would, but for the provisions of this Order, be liable for the council tax in respect of a dwelling on a particular day as the owner, whether or not jointly with any other person.


Owner is defined elsewhere in council tax legislation as the person who holds a material interest (freehold or leasehold) for a period of 6 months or more.

petgri wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest,what would have happened, lets say if I was sole beneficiary and if

a) I wasn't named as an Executor, or

b) I was named but had chosen not to exercise it, power reserved

c) or even refused to act as Executor.

Several permutations above, but in essence, if I had been a beneficiary, but not an Executor, inheriting I assume from the date of Probate, would I then be liable for the full amount from that date (not being able to claim Class F exemption)??

I'm just trying to get a handle on what is 'fair', if you get my drift?

If whether you were designated an Executor or Acted as an Executor was going to cost you a couple of thousand, then maybe you would draft your will differently?

And if this is so, should it not be better publicised?

Cheers Jesper

Unless they do something wrong the executor is not personally liable in that role. It is only in their role as a beneficiary the might have liability. From this thread it is clear that rules are complex and often misunderstood. CIS has been helpful in shedding light. Thankyou.

clearly a beneficiary cannot be a qualifying person for at least 6 month.

The councils view in itself is contradictory when you compare their 'original' and 'later' decisions. Their final decision is to deem that there is a 'qualifying individual', apparently since the granting of probate.

To make this decision they would have to have deemed someone as ordinarily liable for the council tax as the 'owner'. All three siblings would be equal beneficiaries under the will so that they would, applying the council's logic, all fall jointly liable for the council tax... and that is what leads us back to my earlier point regarding only 2 out of 3 being exors etc. and so the Class F cannot apply.

The whole issue is a mess as there are contradictory Valuation Tribunal decisions on the point at which ownership is transferred, whether beneficial interest is an interest for council tax etc (and the beneficiary would thus becomes a 'qualifying person').

For example, regarding the Valuation Tribunal, they found in this case that the sole beneficiary (who was also the executor) fell to be a qualifying person and thus no Class F exemption.

In this case however the brother was the exor and a beneficiary and the sister was only a beneficiary. On the basis that the exor had not had the title updated, the beneficiary (sister) was found to not hold a material interest.