Marriage & 2 houses

T

tevion

Registered User
Messages
34
Just wondering what happens in the following scenario, in relation to marriage.
A couple, who both have their own houses, plan on getting married.
They both avail of the rent a room scheme to help with the mortgage.
After marriage, they will continue to live in their own houses due to work commitments, because they work miles apart.
Can they continue to be taxed seperately in relation to their PPR and to avail of the rent a room relief?
Otherwise if there is only one PPR between them, then not only will one person will have to pay tax on the rental income, but will also have to pay 200 euro per year because of a second home, even though they are technically living there 5 days of the week?
Any advise in this scenario, apart from dont get married?! :)
Can you get married and just not inform revenue for a few years?!
 
even though they are technically living there 5 days of the week?

Can you get married and just not inform revenue for a few years?


These two statements make it sound like your trying to hide something?
 
Why are you afraid of informing the revenue? Don't tell me that you are trying to dodge paying your taxes?
Best, render onto Caesar........
 
tevion said:
Just wondering what happens in the following scenario, in relation to marriage.
A couple, who both have their own houses, plan on getting married.
They both avail of the rent a room scheme to help with the mortgage.
After marriage, they will continue to live in their own houses due to work commitments, because they work miles apart.
Can they continue to be taxed seperately in relation to their PPR and to avail of the rent a room relief?
Otherwise if there is only one PPR between them, then not only will one person will have to pay tax on the rental income, but will also have to pay 200 euro per year because of a second home, even though they are technically living there 5 days of the week?
Any advise in this scenario, apart from dont get married?! :)
Can you get married and just not inform revenue for a few years?!
Click to expand...

Well, as long as you aren't twisting facts to suit yourself (i.e. ye really don't live together), then I don't see any problem with you each having a separate PPR. If ye both owned half of each house it would be different, but if you own one house (where you live), and your spouse owns another house (which is their main residence) then I don't see a problem under the legislation below:

(8) For the purposes of this section, an individual shall not be treated as having more than one main residence at any one time and in so far as it is necessary to determine which of 2 or more residences is an individual's main residence for any period—

(a) that question may be determined by agreement between the inspector and the individual on the latter giving notice in writing to the inspector by the end of the year 1975-76 or within 2 years from the beginning of that period if that is later, and

(b) failing such agreement, the question shall be determined by the inspector, whose determination may be as respects either the whole or specified parts of the period of ownership in question,

and notice of any determination by the inspector under paragraph (b) shall be given to the individual who may appeal to the Appeal Commissioners against that determination within 21 days of service of the notice.

(9) In the case of a man and his wife living with him—

(a) there may be for the purposes of this section only one residence or main residence for both so long as they are living together and, where a notice under subsection (8)(a) affects both the husband and his wife, it must be made by both,

(b) if the one disposes of, or of his or her interest in, the dwelling house or part of a dwelling house which is their only or main residence to the other, or if it passes on death to the other as legatee, the other's period of ownership shall begin with the beginning of the period of ownership of the one making the disposal or from whom it passes on death,

(c) if paragraph (b) applies but the dwelling house or part of a dwelling house was not the only or main residence of both throughout the period of ownership of the one making the disposal, account shall be taken of any part of that period during which it was the only or main residence of the one as if it was also the only or main residence of the other, and

(d) any notice under subsection (8)(b) which affects a residence owned by the husband and a residence owned by the wife shall be given to each and either may appeal under that subsection.
 
Looking for advice out there please, not accusations..
The situation is what it is, as described above, no-one is hiding anything, the wedding date isnt even set! :)
Just weighing up options for when the time comes.
Constructive posts would be greatly appreciated.
 
thanks mandelbrot.
I'm not sure that a married couple are allowed more that one PPR for tax purposes though?
Thats the real problem in this situation.
 
tevion said:
thanks mandelbrot.
I'm not sure that a married couple are allowed more that one PPR for tax purposes though?
Thats the real problem in this situation.
Click to expand...

A married couple is not allowed more than one PPR, unless they are separated, i.e. either legally separated or in such a way that the separation is likely to remain permanent. If they are not "separated" in this way, then they are "living together", it doesn't have to be physically under the same roof 7 days a week.

So in OP's case the only way to keep two PPRs and avail of two rent a room schemes is not get married:)
Or apply set up a legal separation immediately afterwards - but then, why get married?:)

It is a way to discriminate against marriage - if you are not married, you are treated as living together only when you physically do so. If you are married, you are treated as living together unless the marriage has basically broken down.
 
Thanks for that Greta, thought that was the case alright.
Its discrimination as far as I can see unfortunately.
 
Greta said:
A married couple is not allowed more than one PPR, unless they are separated, i.e. either legally separated or in such a way that the separation is likely to remain permanent. If they are not "separated" in this way, then they are "living together", it doesn't have to be physically under the same roof 7 days a week.

So in OP's case the only way to keep two PPRs and avail of two rent a room schemes is not get married:)
Or apply set up a legal separation immediately afterwards - but then, why get married?:)

It is a way to discriminate against marriage - if you are not married, you are treated as living together only when you physically do so. If you are married, you are treated as living together unless the marriage has basically broken down.
Click to expand...

Thanks Greta,

Is this refusal to allow more than one PPR prescribed in the legislation, or is it a Revenue interpretation? And has anyone ever challenged that part of the legislation through the courts I wonder?

Seems a bit unconstitutional; preferable tax treatment for unmarried people, similar areas have been successfully challenged before...
 
Mandelbrot, I don't know. It's definitely on the Revenue website but whether it's legislation or not, I don't know.
Married people do have some preferential tax treatment, no CGT or CAT on transfers between spouses, as well as pension rights, so it's debatable whether they are discriminated against or given preferred treatment.

The same situation with PPR exists in Britain, two unmarried partners can have their own PPR each. If they get married, they have to choose which one will be their PPR. If they don't choose, the Revenue will do it for them, if it becomes relevant (they sell one of the properties or rent a room, for example).

So it is generally better to make the election yourselves, which property to treat as PPR, depending on circumstances. I think the election can be switched between the properties to suit your circumstances.

In OP's case, the best solution would seem to be (from the tax point of view) not to get married until the couple are ready to live together in the same house:) In the meantime, arranging wills and maybe life insurance to cover inheritance tax should one of them die before they marry.

If they do marry, deciding carefully which property to designate as their PPR. For example, if one spouse pays tax at higher rate than the other, it may be worth designating his/her property as PPR to avail of rent a room scheme. Or choose the property that brings in more rent under rent a room scheme.
Or if one property is in positive equity and the other one in the negative, designating the one in positive equity as PPR to avoid CGT if it's sold. Or if both properties can be sold at a profit, choosing the one that the couple eventually plans to sell.

So in conclusion, it's better to take proactive approach rather than hope that the Revenue won't find out about the marriage:)
 
Greta,
Good advice but a question for you (or others on this thread). You say that a married couple with 2 properties should choose one property as their PPR "to suit circumstances". Is this choice a matter solely for the couple or are there hard and fast rules that qualify whether a property is most suited to be the PPR? For example, might one need to prove how man days per year they live, where they work, where there children live during school term, etc, etc? Or is a nominated PPR really just a paper exercise and as long as you dont have multiple PPRs (& you're paying the NPPR tax and all relevant taxes on any others) then revenue are fine.

Any ideas?
 
It's a bit of a grey area but in general there are no hard and fast rules so long as the property that you nominate as your PPR is actually available for your use and you use it at least occasionally. So if a property is fully rented out to tenants, or it's uninhabitable and is boarded up, it can't at the same time be your PPR but if you rent out a room and still have a room available for your use and use it at least occasionally, then it can be nominated as your PPR.

The advantage of nominating a PPR is that otherwise the Revenue will have to determine themselves which one is your PPR, should it ever became an issue, at their discretion, and it may not be what you'd like.

There seems to be a common misconception that you need to physically live at your PPR most of the time - you don't. You do need to use it at least sometimes and it must be available for your use, but that's all, no hard and fast rules.

Have a search on the Revenue website, it's there somewhere.
 
Which house do I pay my PPR on? . Similar to OP we are married and own two houses. one is 100miles from the other. My Wife lives in the counrty with our two children and I work in Dublin and live in our other house where I also look after my OAP father, at weekends Fri,Sat,Sun I go to our house in Country. I consider my Dublin home my PPR but my wife Considers our Counrty home our PPR , So Which do i register as my PPR and which do I pay the PPR Tax on. me thinks the Dublin house but what effect would that have on me in the future if we sell the Country home.
 
Greta - the legislation re NPPR -the Local Govnt Charges Act- states that one is exempt from NPPR on the property which is " the sole or main residence." That suggests that PPR is one's main residence.

But you state that one can declare a property as PPR even if one uses it just "sometimes"

I can understand living in a place only sometimes can still be one's PPR if one is travelling around and staying in many different places on business or a very long vacation.
But if one is staying in one place ,say 90% in Cork and 10% in Sligo can one really claim that the Sligo property is one's PPR ?

I'm not arguing -just seeking source of your definition/explanation of PPR.
 
millieforbes said:
xpresso, does your father live in the house full time?
Click to expand...


Yes he does, so does his partner, When I say I look after him, I dont mean physically He stays in the house rent free but he pays the ESB and Heating bills.

does it make a difference?
 
OP this is oh so not worth it. Tax evasion, is what it looks like. Not an accusation but it would be what revenue would call it which makes it a fact. First step is to talk to revenue and get it in writing that what you propose to do is legit. My understanding is the same as Greta, that a married couple only have one PPR.

As NPPR is a local authority charge, they may allow you off that charge, but you'd want that in writing too.
 
xpresso said:
. Similar to OP we are married and own two houses.

but what effect would that have on me in the future if we sell the Country home.
Click to expand...

Pay the NPPR on the Dublin house. If you sell the country house it would be your PPR (principal private residence) and therefore no CGT (capital gains tax). If you sell the Dublin house, you will pay CGT if you were so lucky as to have a property that has risen if value since you bought it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top