So - the previous two posts would contradict FS's earlier post claiming that this rental situation was "fine" and that additional tax implications (for owner occupier mortgage interest relief, SD clawback and/or CGT) should not be an issue?
I rang the tax office and spoke further to my accountant. The tax office said if the business use section does rely on the rest of the building it is exempt. So if the toilet is in the residence it still remains part of the house and exempt from CRT. THe tax office also said the CRt division would have to be made aware.So - the previous two posts would contradict FS's earlier post claiming that this rental situation was "fine" and that additional tax implications (for owner occupier mortgage interest relief, SD clawback and/or CGT) should not be an issue?
I am going to get it in writing from the tax office what was said to me.
Did they give you any guidance on the income tax implications for the householder on rent received from the company? This is imho a far more immediate and serious issue than the possibility of an eventual CGT hit on disposal of the property.
My brother said he is absolutely certain rental income received from a business is assessable at the marginal rate.
It isn't RENT it is an expense. Nobody is charging rent your putting down the expense of having a room used by a business. No income is being recieved therefore no tax. A cost incured is being claimed on.Did they give you any guidance on the income tax implications for the householder on rent received from the company? This is imho a far more immediate and serious issue than the possibility of an eventual CGT hit on disposal of the property.
It isn't RENT it is an expense. Nobody is charging rent your putting down the expense of having a room used by a business. No income is being recieved therefore no tax. A cost incured is being claimed on.
CGT department would also have to go looking and decide so if they catch you it will be 20% on a portion of the property market value as opposed to 41% now on the cost. I would take that as not a bad move.
It isn't rent, for it to cost something does not mean it has to be rent.This doesn't make sense. An expense is only an expense if it is paid to someone. In this case the expense is being claimed by a company in respect of use of a room owned by an individual. It is obvious that this is Rent - what else could it be.
To avoid double taxation you pay 41% as I discovered. If you have a letter from the tax office staing it is ok I doubt there will be penalties. AS i have said it is up to the individual and what they feel comfortable.What about interest and penalties?
Btw, companies pay tax at 12.5%, not 41%
...your heated view...
You hounded me on another thread over this so what is your problem?
I think we might well agree to disagree on this subject...
I have not claimed to be correct just informed people on what I have been told by accountants and the tax office. I also suggest you check on your own individual basis to be sure.
Btw, I don't ubiquitous is being rude,
Don't beleive what I have been told and what I have explained. It is simply an expense is what I have been told. I have checked it to my satisfaction and awaiting a letter from the tax office. Do what you want but at least stae how you know different if you insist I am wrong. Either way you should ask the the taxman yourself if you want to do it. If you aren't doing it why care?
Lets be 100% clear here I have not querstions anybody's credentials as nobody has stated them!Why do you constantly question the motivations and credentials of people who claim disbelief of your setup? My curiousity has been piqued. My brother works as a tax advisor and several of my acquaintances work in or around this field. When I mention your treatment of your tax affairs they all exclaim complete disbelief that the revenue has sanctioned it. Unless you are paying income tax on the rental income received from your company, in which case they cannot understand why you are doing it this way.
I beleive it is an expense as I have without being rent and have been told so.
I am satisfied that I am doing the correct thing in what I am doing and it is not rent. If you are not don't do it I would suggest anybody that may be able to do it to check it out.
Of course it is an expense - the limited company pays a portion of your mortgage ergo it is an expense for the company. The puzzling thing is how on the other side of the balance sheet it is not income for you, the owner of the property.
My other half is my tenent under rent relief scheme and I am first time buyer (bought 1 yr ago). He has recently set up a website and has been working from home for the past few months. He has now register the company as a limited company and he used our address as the company's registered address.