Finance Bill makes huge changes to Dwelling House Relief for CAT

Status
Not open for further replies.
pity it wasnt just tightened to be just family home and up to x amount . say 500k
Too many chancers i guess
 
But it has been tightened up to be just the family home?

If you live with the deceased and inherit the property, it's tax free.

So the spinster sisters, unmarried couple, or carer still get the property tax free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mtk
Gordon Gekko said:
But it has been tightened up to be just the family home?

If you live with the deceased and inherit the property, it's tax free.

So the spinster sisters, unmarried couple, or carer still get the property tax free.
Click to expand...

Thats fair enough in my view then !

So its only regarding another house they must be dependent in some way to get it CAT free?
 
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
  • Severe curtailment of the broad and unrestrictive application under the current Section 86. Will effectively limit the relief to shared main residences and will prevent an individual simply acquiring a property and allowing another person to reside in the property and effectively pass that property over to that person after 3 years with no inheritance tax.
  • The clawback provisions under the current Section 86, which do not apply if the person is over 55, will be raised to 65.
  • Will essentially restrict the exemption to inheritances and not to gifts – save for those gifts to a dependant relative.
  • The dwelling will have to be occupied by both the disponer and beneficiary at the date of the inheritance save for reasons of infirmity.
 
T McGibney said:
Any law which protects cohabiting siblings and vulnerable adults from hardship arising from excessive or inappropriate taxation is never a bad law.
Click to expand...
Let's imagine a law that delivers €100m of "hardship avoidance" at a cost of €1b.

Without quibbling about whether my Strawman Act is "good" or "bad", can we agree that we should want "better"?
 
Would anyone have the time and knowledge to do a summary of the new rules? I would like to separate that out from the ongoing debate about whether it is a good idea or not.

Brendan
 
trasneoir said:
Let's imagine a law that delivers €100m of "hardship avoidance" at a cost of €1b.

Without quibbling about whether my Strawman Act is "good" or "bad", can we agree that we should want "better"?
Click to expand...

I don't get your point. This particular tax relief never cost a billion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top