# Will Revenue check First Time Buyer Status for Stamp Duty? I had a foreign property.



## HMC (15 Feb 2007)

I was v disappointed to find out that I do not fit the definition of a first-time buyer in Ireland since I owned a property overseas.  That property was sold; I've moved back to Ireland and looking for something to buy.
However, more than one auctioneer and financial advisor (who didn't appear to know the definition of first-time buyer themselves) have told me that I could declare myself a first-time buyer since I've never bought in Ireland and anyway "Revenue won't bother checking".

Opinions?


----------



## ClubMan (15 Feb 2007)

*Re: Will Revenue check Stamp Duty?*



HMC said:


> However, more than one auctioneer and financial advisor (who didn't appear to know the definition of first-time buyer themselves) have told me that I could declare myself a first-time buyer since I've never bought in Ireland and anyway "Revenue won't bother checking".


Very dodgy advice. 

See here for example:

Revenue acts on abuse of stamp duty relief

Who's to say that they won't also investigate ostensible _FTBs _at some stage too? Best not to mess around with _Revenue _or to attempt to evade tax.


----------



## Mag2006 (15 Feb 2007)

*Re: Will Revenue check Stamp Duty?*

 don't listen to them or take their advice on taxation what so ever. Speak to an accountant or tax advisor for the accurate information. Just to clarify:
*Who is a first time buyer?*
A first time buyer is a person, (or, where there is more than one buyer, each of such persons):

who has not on any previous occasion, either individually or jointly, purchased or built on his/her own behalf a house (in Ireland or abroad) and
I am an accountant and you would be risking getting done for tax evasion do my advice would be to play it straight. I am aware of friends of mine that have been told by an EA ways to avoid it and I always say no and I can understand the temptation.


----------



## Dreamerb (15 Feb 2007)

*Re: Will Revenue check Stamp Duty?*

Well - let's see:

If you declare yourself to be a first time buyer when you're not, in order to avoid tax liabilities, that's fraud and tax evasion. Quite aside from the AAM owner and moderators' stance, which is that AAM does not condone tax evasion and won't allow discussion of how to engage in such illegal practices, there are lots of crabby posters like my good self  who would respectfully suggest that you pay your taxes like the rest of us, please. 

Revenue is increasingly reviewing property purchases, and is making very public noises which must be seen to be a preliminary to a major crackdown on various forms of evasion (the most obvious being in relation to rental properties, non-declaration of rental income, and stamp duty clawback where a house is rented out within five years of FTB purchase). Since, frankly, any idiot can see this coming, you'd be advised to keep your tax affairs in order and tell any auctioneer or financial advisor who suggests otherwise that you'l report them to the relevant regulatory or professional bodies of which they may be members. 

Remember, if you follow their "advice", and are subsequently assessed by Revenue and have to pay the tax, arrears, and interest, it'll be coming out of your bank account, not theirs. 

I would suggest that if you wish to minimise your tax liability, buy a new house if you can as it may be stamp duty exempt, and contact Revenue directly to consult them about your entitlement to TRS - there may be a greater level of flexibility there depending on your circumstances.


----------



## NorfBank (15 Feb 2007)

*Re: Will Revenue check Stamp Duty?*

You will be asked to sign a declaration that you have not purchased property here or before. If you lie on this form and are found out (even if this happens well into the future) you will be prosecuted for fraud and will have to pay back the stamp you saved plus any penalty imposed. It's up to you to run the risk but as been discussed before the Revenue are getting more savvy about this so it would not be stretching the imagination too much to see them link up with the  UK Revenue in the not too distant future.


----------



## bacchus (15 Feb 2007)

Depending as to whether you intend to buy new or second-hand property, FTB status  may be irrelevant..

You will be ask about the source of the money when you transfer to Ireland the proceeds of your house sold abroad....or may be have you already done that and filled up a form.


----------



## ClubMan (15 Feb 2007)

*Re: Will Revenue check First Time Buyer Status for Stamp Duty? I had a foreign proper*



bacchus said:


> Depending as to whether you intend to buy new or second-hand property, FTB status  may be irrelevant..


Good point. If new and under 125sqm or otherwise exempt from stamp duty or second hand and over €635K then it's irrelevant. Not otherwise though unless I'm mistaken.


----------



## restless (17 Oct 2010)

Does anyone know what the situation is if you own a property abroad, but have been given it as a gift years ago? To believe the following definition of a first time buyer (which is the only one I could find online): "who has not on any previous occasion, either individually or jointly, * purchased *or *built *on his/her own behalf a house (in Ireland or abroad)", one would think you still qualify as a first time buyer. And it's not even a house, but a small apartment worth peanuts in Irish money. However, we get conflicting messages from different solicitors...


----------



## BazFitz (17 Oct 2010)

From Revenue's own guidance notes:

_"*Can I avail of first time buyer relief if I previously received a gift of a house?*_

_The relief can be claimed where the gift of the house was received prior to 22 June 2000 (or prior to 27 June 2000 in the case of *part* of a house).  A gift received after the above date(s) is regarded as a prior purchase and would preclude a person from claiming the relief."_


----------



## restless (17 Oct 2010)

Thanks. The gift was years before that, so we are safe. Huge burden off our shoulders


----------



## BazFitz (17 Oct 2010)

restless said:


> Thanks. The gift was years before that, so we are safe. Huge burden off our shoulders


 
Good to hear. I was hoping that "years ago" meant pre June 2000! I suspected that it might (but then again that's probably an age thing - My little sister for example probably considers 2005 to be "years ago"!).

Be mindful of any CGT, CAT and IT implications of foreign property ownership also.


----------



## Maxwellhouse (20 Oct 2010)

I'm still unclear about First time buyers, property abroad and tax relief on mortgage.
Briefly the query is:
 X lived abroad ( EU country) for approx 10 years. Bought a flat there and lived in the flat.Did not sell flat on returning to Ireland.
In 2006, 8 years after returning home to Ireland, x built a new house which is and has been his place of residence since the house was completed.
X declared himself a First Time Buyer as he was led to believe this was the case in relation to obtaining tax relief on mortgage repayments. However  X now  has doubts about this. The concern is with tax relief on Mortgage repayments only, stamp duty does not apply in this case. So was X correct in declaring himself a First Time Buyer ? If not what are the consequences?


----------



## BazFitz (20 Oct 2010)

Maxwellhouse said:


> I'm still unclear about First time buyers, property abroad and tax relief on mortgage.
> Briefly the query is:
> X lived abroad ( EU country) for approx 10 years. Bought a flat there and lived in the flat.Did not sell flat on returning to Ireland.
> In 2006, 8 years after returning home to Ireland, x built a new house which is and has been his place of residence since the house was completed.
> X declared himself a First Time Buyer as he was led to believe this was the case in relation to obtaining tax relief on mortgage repayments. However X now has doubts about this. The concern is with tax relief on Mortgage repayments only, stamp duty does not apply in this case. So was X correct in declaring himself a First Time Buyer ? If not what are the consequences?


 
X should not have declared himself a first time buyer because he was not a first time buyer.  The consequences are that the differential between the first time buyer relief and the non first time buyer relief plus interest and possibly plus penalties should be payable to Revenue.


----------



## Mrs Vimes (21 Oct 2010)

X had not previously claimed mortgage interest relief so for the purpose of this relief he was a first time buyer. He may wish to ring Revenue to confirm this and set his mind at ease.

Sybil


----------



## errnoi1 (21 Oct 2010)

Good point.


----------

