Capital Gains tax man chasing buy to let landlords

So how long do you need to reside at an address for it to count as your main residence?

Good question! I thought it was 12 months, but can't find anything to confirm that.

No doubt theres something on the govt site, but just seen an interesting article that may shed some more light?

Is your Principal Private Residence Property totally CGT tax-free? | Capital Taxes | Tax Articles

House prices are ridiculously high.

I personally believe that there should be a limit on the number of buy-to-let properties one can buy - this is one reason for lack of supply and increased demand.

The CGT increases are a good way of attacking the problem.

Good luck to the IRS.

Agree prices are too high, but interesting statement, while confirming your a capitalist in another post?

At what point should legislation intervene in business, which buy to let is for a lot of people.

Maybe a capitalist in a socialist overcoat?

Hi - The answer to this CGT question is that there is no set period. Some tax commentators would recommend at least twelve months spanning the tax year end. The Revenue will look at the quality of occupation of the property and intentions.

I can recall a case reported some time ago where the taxpayer won the argument. This was a large period property set in a small town with bags of history surrounding its buildings and location. The buyer spent a small fortune on the property and sold it on without taking up occupation at all. The Revenue challenge was no doubt influenced by the fact that the buyer was a property developer and the gain was significant.

The taxpayer was able to establish that he and his wife had purchased and improved the property with the full intention of occupying it as their main residence. The reason that they did not move in was that his wife refused to do so because of the resident ghost!

Perhaps it's weird, but as lefty as I am I have no problem with the principle of buy-to-let done properly. If someone with enough money to buy an extra house decides to use their nest egg to buy an extra house and make a business out of renting it to others to provide an additional income in retirement or something, fair enough. That said, I'd like to see more stringent application of our existing laws to protect both tenants and landlords from unscrupulous landlords/tenants who don't keep up their end of the contract.

But all of the messing about with switching your status to avoid paying CGT, or using a buy-to-let property to get your kids into the "right" catchment area and so on... it just feels like fraud by any other name and leaves a really nasty taste in my mouth.

Socialist in a capitalist overcoat