# Two elderly straight men getting married to reduce CAT



## Brendan Burgess (16 Dec 2017)

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1215/927697-tax-marriage/

Michael O'Sullivan has been best friends with his 85-year-old neighbour Matt for almost three decades, and is now his carer.

Speaking on RTÉ's Liveline on Radio 1, Mr O'Sullivan said that Matt told him he was planning on leaving his house in Dublin's Stoneybatter to him when he died.

Mr O'Sullivan said this posed a potential problem as "because of tax reasons I'd have to pay half of that to the Government" in Capital Acquisitions Tax.

However, people who are married or in civil partnerships are exempt from Capital Acquisitions Tax on items of inheritance from their partner.

Speaking on the same programme, Matt said "he's my best friend, we're getting married so whatever I have in my home he can have."


----------



## fistophobia (16 Dec 2017)

B, I nearly spilled my corn flakes when I read this. Do you think Revenue will clamp down on this sort of thing?


----------



## Threadser (16 Dec 2017)

It's going to be a difficult one to prove whether this type of marriage is "official" or not!


----------



## odyssey06 (16 Dec 2017)

Sounds like genuine relationship... bromance not romance.


----------



## JohnJay (16 Dec 2017)

I'm sure it has been happening in Male/female relationships for years.


----------



## Threadser (16 Dec 2017)

JohnJay said:


> I'm sure it has been happening in Male/female relationships for years.


You could be right there!


----------



## mtk (16 Dec 2017)

That's put the CAT among the pigeons but
marriages are not homogenous so we need to straighten this out


----------



## delfio (16 Dec 2017)

Just looking at title, I don't think a 55 year could be classed as elderly


----------



## TheBigShort (16 Dec 2017)

Im wondering if it was a male/female relationship would it have made the news at all?


----------



## Gordon Gekko (16 Dec 2017)

Revenue should insist that marriages are consumated...


----------



## delfio (16 Dec 2017)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Revenue should insist that marriages are consumated...


----------



## Gordon Gekko (16 Dec 2017)

In all seriousness, if his carer is living with him, the Dwelling House Exemption would probably apply and exempt the property...


----------



## dub_nerd (16 Dec 2017)

fistophobia said:


> B, I nearly spilled my corn flakes when I read this. Do you think Revenue will clamp down on this sort of thing?


I doubt Revenue could clamp down on it. Transfers between spouses are not subject to any tests for romantic involvement. So far, Irish courts consider marriages of convenience to be valid, even though registrars are now allowed to consider whether they are designed to circumvent immigration rules. [broken link removed] likewise are limited to questions of immigration.  It's something I've idly considered myself when thinking about ways of transferring assets to a sibling tax free. In that case, of course, there are additional barriers concerning consanguinity.  So I'd need to marry a mutual friend, gift them the assets, divorce, have them marry the sibling and do the same gift/divorce thing. It's all a bit messy, but in principle sounds like a great legal approach to tax planning.


----------



## ClubMan (16 Dec 2017)

Could be interesting if they ever fall out and one or both want a separation/divorce...
I'm sure that everybody thinks or hopes it's forever when they enter into marriage.


----------



## torblednam (16 Dec 2017)

dub_nerd said:


> I doubt Revenue could clamp down on it. Transfers between spouses are not subject to any tests for romantic involvement. So far, Irish courts consider marriages of convenience to be valid, even though registrars are now allowed to consider whether they are designed to circumvent immigration rules. [broken link removed] likewise are limited to questions of immigration.  It's something I've idly considered myself when thinking about ways of transferring assets to a sibling tax free. In that case, of course, there are additional barriers concerning consanguinity.  So I'd need to marry a mutual friend, gift them the assets, divorce, have them marry the sibling and do the same gift/divorce thing. It's all a bit messy, but in principle sounds like a great legal approach to tax planning.



A bit messy is an understatement. I don't see what could possibly go wrong in all of that...


----------



## Joe_90 (16 Dec 2017)

Gordon Gekko said:


> In all seriousness, if his carer is living with him, the Dwelling House Exemption would probably apply and exempt the property...



They hardly missed this, did they???


----------



## dub_nerd (16 Dec 2017)

dub_nerd said:


> I doubt Revenue could clamp down on it. Transfers between spouses are not subject to any tests for romantic involvement. So far, Irish courts consider marriages of convenience to be valid, even though registrars are now allowed to consider whether they are designed to circumvent immigration rules. [broken link removed] likewise are limited to questions of immigration.  It's something I've idly considered myself when thinking about ways of transferring assets to a sibling tax free. In that case, of course, there are additional barriers concerning consanguinity.  So I'd need to marry a mutual friend, gift them the assets, divorce, have them marry the sibling and do the same gift/divorce thing. It's all a bit messy, but in principle sounds like a great legal approach to tax planning.





torblednam said:


> A bit messy is an understatement. I don't see what could possibly go wrong in all of that...



Not nearly as messy as giving a third of your assets to the government unnecessarily.


----------



## Monbretia (16 Dec 2017)

While the younger man was the carer I don't think he was living with the older man, I understood from the interview that he is actually in another relationship.  The older man too was asked what about if the younger man met someone and wanted to get married, his answer gave the impression that he would not be around for long, I wondered was he ill based on the way he answered.


----------



## MrEarl (16 Dec 2017)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Revenue should insist that marriages are consumated...



With video evidence ?  

Just imagine the Revenue decide to investigate the two lads, to see if their relationship is genuine - what do they do, ask for the last 4 years love letters, holiday photos etc ? 


In honestly, it took me a while to stop laughing about this story, but it's great stuff really ....

Just out of interest, has anyone check the legality of having both a wife and a husband ?  ... odds are, our bigamy laws were written so long ago that it never occurred to the legislators that this may some day become a realistic possibility, so the legal wording may not cater for this scenario.  Tax consultants could be suggesting some very interesting new arrangements, if it's a runner


----------



## Philip S (18 Dec 2017)

MrEarl said:


> Just out of interest, has anyone check the legality of having both a wife and a husband ?  ... odds are, our bigamy laws were written so long ago that it never occurred to the legislators that this may some day become a realistic possibility, so the legal wording may not cater for this scenario.  Tax consultants could be suggesting some very interesting new arrangements, if it's a runner



going by some of the odd laws in Ireland over the years around rape it would not surprise me if the above could happen but more then likely i would imagine the bigamy laws are wrote in such as way that it sees marriage as it is defined in the marriage law (ireland) Amendment act 1863. so once that act is kept updated its fine. But part of me want it not to updated so we have a bit of entertainment


----------



## Thirsty (18 Dec 2017)

At the risk of sounding cynical, I doubt there would have been the same lobbying to extend the marriage laws if there had not been significant financial advantages to being married.

As for the two men in question - I wasn't a bit surprised.  I know of couples who have 'strategically' separated in order to purchase a second home and minimise tax implications.


----------



## noproblem (18 Dec 2017)

Revenue have pursued cases where taxpayers used certain ruses to get around not paying tax. I feel they will investigate this, as the people involved have said they're doing it so as to avoid paying tax. I use the word avoid and not evade but they'll (revenue) look into it because it could become a well used vehicle. In any case, it's wrong. Just my opinion.


----------



## ClubMan (18 Dec 2017)

Monbretia said:


> While the younger man was the carer I don't think he was living with the older man


They were onto Joe again today and from what I heard he IS living with the older man after he lost his home/apartment for some reason a while back and they decided that the quid pro quo for him looking after the older man was that he would be left the house when the older man died. 


> I understood from the interview that he is actually in another relationship.


Neither mentioned any other relationship today.

The older man sounded like a very kind gentle soul.


----------



## Firefly (18 Dec 2017)

Great story. What I'd like to know is who does the dishes and who takes out the rubbish


----------



## Monbretia (18 Dec 2017)

Yes I heard them again today and I thought initially the older man was ill but I don't think so after listening to it today and yes it was clear that they are living together, as friends obviously!


----------



## Thirsty (19 Dec 2017)

> What I'd like to know is who does the dishes and who takes out the rubbish


Why?


----------



## newirishman (19 Dec 2017)

Thirsty said:


> Why?



probably because some people find it difficult to move on from gender stereotypes out of the 1950ies...


----------



## LDFerguson (19 Dec 2017)

noproblem said:


> Revenue have pursued cases where taxpayers used certain ruses to get around not paying tax. I feel they will investigate this, as the people involved have said they're doing it so as to avoid paying tax. I use the word avoid and not evade but they'll (revenue) look into it because it could become a well used vehicle.



I was only thinking about this today.  Could the publicity that these people have received work against them?  One of the accountants or tax professionals on this board might be able to verify or refute this, but I think that, somewhere in the legislation Revenue have a "catch-all" power to the effect that, if Revenue believe that a transaction has occurred for the sole purpose of avoiding tax, Revenue can still charge tax even though no specific rules have been broken.

These people might have been better off getting married quietly and telling nobody.


----------



## T McGibney (19 Dec 2017)

LDFerguson said:


> I was only thinking about this today.  Could the publicity that these people have received work against them?  One of the accountants or tax professionals on this board might be able to verify or refute this, but I think that, somewhere in the legislation Revenue have a "catch-all" power to the effect that, if Revenue believe that a transaction has occurred for the sole purpose of avoiding tax, Revenue can still charge tax even though no specific rules have been broken.
> 
> These people might have been better off getting married quietly and telling nobody.



I had thought of that Liam and I'm no legal eagle but I suspect the constitutional freedom to marry overrides tax anti-avoidance legislation, on the grounds that the institution of marriage is more than a transaction.


----------



## noproblem (19 Dec 2017)

I don't know if it was in the newspaper or on the radio I heard it, but neither the revenue nor the Gardai are interested in having anything to do with this case. All I can say to them is good luck and hope it all works out. Saw both last night on tv and they come across as being nice people. 
I also felt the programme last night was making a bigger issue of this that needs to be made, especially the politically correct gay members of both the panel and audience. Amazing the sly way RTE try to angle a programme. One would think they might learn from the Pat Kenny debacle on Frontline concerning the lies told by the host about one of the Presidential candidates.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (19 Dec 2017)

LDFerguson said:


> I was only thinking about this today.  Could the publicity that these people have received work against them?  One of the accountants or tax professionals on this board might be able to verify or refute this, but I think that, somewhere in the legislation Revenue have a "catch-all" power to the effect that, if Revenue believe that a transaction has occurred for the sole purpose of avoiding tax, Revenue can still charge tax even though no specific rules have been broken.
> 
> These people might have been better off getting married quietly and telling nobody.



Section 811, general anti-avoidance.

It’s hard to see how this could fall under 811, as it’s not a transaction, and in any event I’m sure plenty of people marry for the tax benefits. But the gas thing is that the Dwelling House Exemption probably would have exempted the home from CAT in any event.


----------



## HollyBud (19 Dec 2017)

Great story and seem like two nice guys. Seen them interviewed and no way the older guy is straight...no way... Good luck to them.


----------



## Threadser (20 Dec 2017)

The sexual orientation of the older man is not relevant. They are not in a relationship. They are friends who have chosen to marry to avail of a tax advantage available to married couples.


----------



## llgon (20 Dec 2017)

Threadser said:


> The sexual orientation of the older man is not relevant.



Have you seen the title of this thread?


----------



## Threadser (20 Dec 2017)

I have seen the title of the thread and I don't think the orientation of either man matters. It is possible to be gay, straight or bi and not fancy your "friend". The issue here is that they are not in a relationship but have a friendship that has lasted 30 years. The marriage is a purely practical arrangement to facilitate the transfer of an asset. They might be "setting a new trend"!


----------



## HollyBud (20 Dec 2017)

The title of the thread maybe misleading, that's all I'm saying, it's states 2 straight men and in my opinion after seen them interviewed I doubt very much this is the case. Elderly guy definitely gay which leads me to think maybe both are and they are infact in a relationship


----------



## newirishman (21 Dec 2017)

HollyBud said:


> The title of the thread maybe misleading, that's all I'm saying, it's states 2 straight men and in my opinion after seen them interviewed I doubt very much this is the case. Elderly guy definitely gay which leads me to think maybe both are and they are infact in a relationship



You can figure out from watching a person for a few minutes giving an interview if the person is gay?
Wow. Not that I really care, but could you share your insights? Would one need to look out for a secret handshake or something like that?


----------



## Gordon Gekko (21 Dec 2017)

newirishman said:


> You can figure out from watching a person for a few minutes giving an interview if the person is gay?
> Wow. Not that I really care, but could you share your insights? Would one need to look out for a secret handshake or something like that?



You’re right. You could have knocked me over with a feather when I heard that Kenneth Williams, Graham Norton, Al Porter and Panti Bliss were gay. What am I missing?


----------



## Bronte (21 Dec 2017)

Gordon Gekko said:


> You’re right. You could have knocked me over with a feather when I heard that Kenneth Williams, Graham Norton, Al Porter and Panti Bliss were gay. What am I missing?



Those guys are obviously camp.  As far as I know Barry Humpries never has claimed to be gay.  And what about the many gay men who married and have children without anyone ever suspecting they are gay.


----------



## newirishman (21 Dec 2017)

Never mind.


----------



## Ceist Beag (21 Dec 2017)

The elderly man was asked if he was gay and said he was not. As newirishman said, could those of you claiming he is "definitely gay" please explain how you seem to know better based on hearing him being interviewed?


----------



## llgon (21 Dec 2017)

Ceist Beag said:


> As newirishman said, could those of you claiming he is "definitely gay"



There is only one poster who has said this.


----------



## HollyBud (21 Dec 2017)

It was the conclusion I came to after watching him being interviewed. Firstly I thought he was pretty camp, secondly he proposed to the man he lives with and loves. They are having a proper big wedding, hotel, meal, guest list etc. not just a registry office. The younger man stated that some of his children were not happy for reasons that he did not want to discuss further.

I’m sorry if you don’t agree but I think there is more to this then they are saying…


----------



## odyssey06 (22 Dec 2017)

Eh... congratulations I guess! You may now kiss the groom...
http://www.thejournal.ie/marriage-tax-reasons-3766958-Dec2017/


----------



## ClubMan (25 Dec 2017)

Ceist Beag said:


> The elderly man was asked if he was gay and said he was not. As newirishman said, could those of you claiming he is "definitely gay" please explain how you seem to know better based on hearing him being interviewed?


https://www.seattletimes.com/nation...-sex-marriage-a-tax-benefit-and-wait-a-twist/



> And here is another twist in the tale. True, they are not a gay couple, but one of the men is gay. (Irish news media, the men said, reported that the two are straight and never thought to ask whether one of them is gay.)
> 
> Murphy said he had always been gay, and he has had long-term relationships in the past.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dan Murray (25 Dec 2017)

Clubman,

If want you are reporting is true, it means that the title of this thread is wrong and more disturbingly that we simply can't rely on everything that we read in the papers.  This would be an appalling vista indeed.

Happy Christmas!

Dan


----------



## HollyBud (25 Dec 2017)

newirishman said:


> could you share your insights



If it looks like a duck....

Some things are just plain obvious


----------



## Dan Murray (25 Dec 2017)

Fair play, Bud

You was outnumbered but you was right! Over the years, I've noticed how some people are just more perceptive than others when it comes to certain things.


----------



## HollyBud (14 Jan 2020)

His investment has just paid out


----------



## Buddyboy (14 Jan 2020)

I am saddened by his passing. From what I've read, he appears to have been a lovely, gentle, and generous man.  I'm also saddened that his legacy will be looked on as a "tax dodge" by some, rather than a way of giving his best friend and carer (and husband) more of his worldly goods.

And if I'm being honest, I find the wording of your post a bit crass, and would ask you to edit it, please.


----------



## noproblem (14 Jan 2020)

HollyBud said:


> His investment has just paid out


A very crude way of putting it. Quite ignorant in fact.


----------



## HollyBud (14 Jan 2020)

Call it what you will, this was a tax dodge pure and simple, the lads if fairness didn’t denign this fact.
They got married so one of lads wasn’t saddled with a big tax bill, when the older one died.
As for the wording, well an investment means “an act of devoting time, effort, or energy to a particular undertaking with the expectation of a worthwhile result.” 
I have no idea if there was more to it so i can only comment on what was reported.


----------

