Stamp Duty

  • Thread starter Munsterlass_
  • Start date
M

Munsterlass_

Guest
Hi peoples opinions on this one would be great as i am concerned?

I both a house with my ex-partner a couple of years ago, about the time we moved in we unfortunately seperated. I lived in the house for very short period, merely weeks.
It took almost 2 years until i then sold my share in the property over to him for a lump sum. (Note: we were not married). I can provide proof that i was not residing in the house.

I now want to buy a new house, both the mortgage advisor and solicitor advise i am still classified as a first time buyer as the old house was not classified as my primary residence due to me never living there. The house is second hand property.

To the taxman i recieved a lump sum in 2007 free from tax, therefore i am reluctant to believe the revenue would not chase me for Stamp duty?

Has anyone an opinion?
 
If you were on the mortgage or deeds of the old house, then you are not an FTB for stamp duty purposes.

The house should have been your PPR in order for the lump sum (if it was in excess of the portion you paid initially) to be validly treated as tax free. If it wasn't your residence, then it was an investment property (you can only have one or the other) and any gain you may have made (I don't know if you made any) should have been liable to CGT.

I'm surprised that your solicitor would say any different with regard to your FTB status, but it may be the case that you were neither on the deeds nor the mortgage of the first house. You would still be an FTB for mortgage relief purposes as you are within the first 1+6 years since you bought the old house - perhaps that's what they are referring to? From the detail you have posted, it appears to me that you are not an FTB for stamp duty purposes.

Sprite
 
I'd pay 150 euro (???) and see a tax consultant. Piece of mind would be worth it to me - no point getting caught down the road with interest/penalties on top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top