Visit our Blog Visit our Facebook page  Visit our Twitter page  Visit our LinkedIn page
  • Home
    • Our credentials
    • Our team
    • Our experience
    • Our publications
    • Berg Kaprow Lewis
  • Our Services
    • Services to individuals
    • Services to businesses
    • Services to tax professionals
    • Tax investigation services
    • News and Information
  • Useful Tools
    • Business fact sheets
    • Tax calculators
    • Tax tables
    • HMRC and Companies House forms
    • The Budget 2012
    • The Autumn Statement 2011
    • The Budget 2011
    • New business kit
  • Contact Us
    • Directions
    • Enquiry form
BKL Tax Consultants
Creative Tax Thinking
Date:

Related Links

Our credentials
Our team
Our experience
Our publications
Berg Kaprow Lewis

BrassTax news

Make a house a home

This is not only a particularly annoying advertising slogan: it is also a piece of good advice for anyone seeking relief under TCGA 1992 s222 (CGT "main residence" relief).  And it was precisely what one Jason Terrence Moore failed to persuade the First Tier Tribunal he had done in a recent case before them [2010] UKFTT 445 (TC).

The facts were fairly simple: Mr Moore lived with his girlfriend (who later became his wife) until December 1999.  They bought a house together in December 1999 and he (but not she) allegedly lived there for a couple of months while renovating it and before letting it.  There was, unfortunately for Mr Moore, no documentary evidence of his residence: no insurance or utility bills, for example and no registration for Council Tax or water rates.  And the only furniture at the property was a bed and a cooker.

To secure the relief, Mr Moore needed to discharge the onus of proof to show that the property had been his only or main residence: the Tribunal held that he had not demonstrated that it was his residence at all, let alone his only or main one, accepting instead HMRC's contention that "the Appellant's occupation of the Bishop's Rise Property did not have the quality that turned mere occupation of it into its being his residence".

The case does not create any precedent: it is long established that the relief requires not merely ownership and occupation but something more: that the property must be the claimant's home.  Exactly what that means is, like so many tax concepts, easier to recognise than to define: but the Court of Appeal's attempt in Goodwin v Curtis 70 TC 478 is a good start: "There must be some degree of permanence, some degree of continuity, some expectation of continuity".

Not a precedent, then; but a warning: first, that the onus of showing that relief is available is on the claimant: second that a claim without any documentary evidence is always going to be vulnerable; third, that "residence" requires much more than moving in for a couple of months with barely any furniture and moving out again as soon as the renovations are complete.  To get the relief, take some trouble: in fact – "Make a House a Home".

Back to top

Berg Kaprow Lewis LLP | Tax Advice London
Head Office:
35 Ballards Lane, London, N3 1XW.
T: 020 8922 9222 F: 020 8922 9223 E: post@bkl.co.uk
Legal disclaimer | Terms & conditions | VAT No. GB 805 9616 16

IAPA, ACCA, Investors in People, UK200 Group, ICEAW