ubiquitous
Registered User
- Messages
- 3,782
"If so, can you point me to the legislation that provides solicitors with the right to withhold client funds? It might come in handy some day."
Section 1034 Taxes Consolidation Act 1997.
mf
1034.—A person not resident in the State, whether a citizen of
Ireland or not, shall be assessable and chargeable to income tax in
the name of any trustee, guardian, or committee of such person, or
of any factor, agent, receiver, branch or manager, whether such
factor, agent, receiver, branch or manager has the receipt of the profits
or gains or not, in the like manner and to the like amount as such
non-resident person would be assessed and charged if such person
were resident in the State and in the actual receipt of such profits or
gains; but, in the case of a partnership, the precedent partner (within
the meaning of section 1007) or, if there is no precedent partner, the
factor, agent, receiver, branch or manager shall be deemed to be the
agent of a non-resident partner.
Besides, even I (a non-lawyer) would happily take on this case, because the legislation clearly states that this section applies to income tax. Case dismissed.
Taxes Consolidation Act, 1997
1043 1997 39 Application of sections 1034 and 1035 for purposes of capital gains tax.
1043.—Without prejudice to the generality of section 931(2), of sections 1034 and 1035 shall apply, subject to any necessary modifications, to capital gains tax.
If the solicitor still holds the funds then the OP is not, legally speaking, in receipt of any capital gain and hence doesn't have any tax liability.
Totally incorrect. CGT applies on the disposal of an asset, regardless of whether the vendor is in receipt of funds, or for that matter, whether monies change hands at all. That is why gifts of land etc are taxable to CGT.
"By what legal authority does the solicitor refuse to release the funds? As I showed s1034 does not apply. "
Did you read post 24 above? It may apply. If any of the OP's siblings are not tax resident, solicitor will be personally responsible for any CGT payable and, in reality, the only way to make sure that that does not happen is to discharge the entire liability.
I note OP has gone remarkably quiet.
mf
But they may not be non-resident. That is what I would like to get to the bottom of.
Just curious , how many siblings are involved, eg if it was 5 and you are all entitled to 381K tax inheritance then only if the house was valued at more than 1.9 Million,I am open to correction but I thought this was the procedure providing money has not been given before.
I would have thought that it is pointless to speculate further until/unless the OP clarifies this. As mf1 says, they have gone quiet.
OP - suggest to the solicitor that he keeps 20 % ie 28,000 of the 140000 sale price less costs figure you mentioned. He would be more than covered then if there was a tax liability. I too thought that as it's a self assessment tax it was nothing to do with the solicitor, I don't know why but I thought they only had to hold on to it only in cases of a sale of more than 500000 but I'm not sure on this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?