In responding to HMRC’s plans to extend CGT to non-residents in certain circumstances, the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) has voiced concern over the proposed withdrawal of the principal residence election for all taxpayers.
In responding to HMRC’s plans to extend CGT to non-residents in certain circumstances, the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) has voiced concern over the proposed withdrawal of the principal residence election for all taxpayers. Under the proposals, non-residents will be able to claim principal private residence (PPR) relief, but to ensure that this relief does not undermine the proposals, the government intends to withdraw the ability of any person with more than one residential property, including UK residents, to choose his or her main residence by election. Instead, it will be left to HMRC to determine, based upon ‘demonstrable’ evidence, which of the owner’s properties is his or her main residence.
Stephen Coleclough, immediate former CIOT president, said: ‘If the government wants to change the PPR election, or the rule generally, there should be a freestanding consultation on that issue ... Changes to how primary residency is decided should not be hidden behind an obscure consultation, aimed at bringing a narrow group of non-residents into the charge. These points should be considered in an open and grown up manner, and we urge the government to think again on this issue.’
In responding to HMRC’s plans to extend CGT to non-residents in certain circumstances, the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) has voiced concern over the proposed withdrawal of the principal residence election for all taxpayers.
In responding to HMRC’s plans to extend CGT to non-residents in certain circumstances, the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) has voiced concern over the proposed withdrawal of the principal residence election for all taxpayers. Under the proposals, non-residents will be able to claim principal private residence (PPR) relief, but to ensure that this relief does not undermine the proposals, the government intends to withdraw the ability of any person with more than one residential property, including UK residents, to choose his or her main residence by election. Instead, it will be left to HMRC to determine, based upon ‘demonstrable’ evidence, which of the owner’s properties is his or her main residence.
Stephen Coleclough, immediate former CIOT president, said: ‘If the government wants to change the PPR election, or the rule generally, there should be a freestanding consultation on that issue ... Changes to how primary residency is decided should not be hidden behind an obscure consultation, aimed at bringing a narrow group of non-residents into the charge. These points should be considered in an open and grown up manner, and we urge the government to think again on this issue.’
