Hello,
I have a problem and need some advice. I have two properties, my own private residence and a let property which was my original home. We lived in the original property from 2000 to 2006 and then bought a larger property and moved. We kept the first house and it has been let since to tenants.
When we bought the new house, we split the total new mortgage with a new banking institution equally between the two houses. This meant that the actual mortgage amount for the new house, now our principal residence, was split between two loan accounts. The original mortgage for the first house bought in 2000 was significantly lower than the amount of the loan account for this property.
When discussing this with Revenue back in 2006, they told me that the Tax Relief at Source could be claimed on both mortgage accounts, as some of the amount on the original property was related to my principal residence. So they set this up and I was receiving TRS on both loans pro rata to the original split.
Now I have been contacted by Revenue stating that I should not be claiming TRS on the loan amount on the let property, even if it is related to the Principal property.
So...can I get your view on this? I believe that the Revenue were right in 2006 to split the TRS between the two loans, contrary to what they are telling me now. However, if it's not the case, surely they were in the wrong originally for setting this up for me? Their latest statement is "only your Principal Private Residence is eligible for interest relief", so I am being charged for years of claimed TRS. This statement is ok, but surely it does not preclude the amount being split between two properties?
Looking forward to your views.
FranJ
I have a problem and need some advice. I have two properties, my own private residence and a let property which was my original home. We lived in the original property from 2000 to 2006 and then bought a larger property and moved. We kept the first house and it has been let since to tenants.
When we bought the new house, we split the total new mortgage with a new banking institution equally between the two houses. This meant that the actual mortgage amount for the new house, now our principal residence, was split between two loan accounts. The original mortgage for the first house bought in 2000 was significantly lower than the amount of the loan account for this property.
When discussing this with Revenue back in 2006, they told me that the Tax Relief at Source could be claimed on both mortgage accounts, as some of the amount on the original property was related to my principal residence. So they set this up and I was receiving TRS on both loans pro rata to the original split.
Now I have been contacted by Revenue stating that I should not be claiming TRS on the loan amount on the let property, even if it is related to the Principal property.
So...can I get your view on this? I believe that the Revenue were right in 2006 to split the TRS between the two loans, contrary to what they are telling me now. However, if it's not the case, surely they were in the wrong originally for setting this up for me? Their latest statement is "only your Principal Private Residence is eligible for interest relief", so I am being charged for years of claimed TRS. This statement is ok, but surely it does not preclude the amount being split between two properties?
Looking forward to your views.
FranJ