Station Road, Sidcup

How can we help?

Please fill in this form and we'll get back to you as soon as possible.

Please enter your name
Please enter your email address
Please enter your telephone number
Please enter a question
Please let us know how you heard about us
Please enter the verification code

We’ll only use this information to handle your enquiry and we won’t share it with any third parties. For more details see our Privacy Policy

Relationship Come to an End? Do You Understand the Tax Implications?

The end of a relationship will often have important tax implications which might only be apparent to a trained professional. That was certainly so in the case of a woman who, following the collapse of her marriage, was saddled with a substantial Capital Gains Tax (CGT) bill on the sale of her ex-husband's home.

Prior to their divorce, the husband moved out of the former matrimonial home into another property which they jointly owned. After renovating the other property, the husband sold it at a substantial profit. As the property was not the wife's principal private residence, HM Revenue and Customs assessed her for £14,376 in CGT on the transaction.

Ruling on her challenge to that bill, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) noted that, following their separation, the couple informally agreed that she would retain the former matrimonial home whilst he would have the other property. That arrangement was subsequently reflected in their divorce settlement. However, when the sale went through, she remained the other property's joint legal owner.

She had made a £100,000 commitment towards the property's purchase. Following their separation, however, she ceased contributing towards the mortgage and played no part in its subsequent renovation and sale. She never occupied it and received none of the sale proceeds.

In upholding her appeal, the FTT found that the informal separation agreement had the effect of transferring the entirety of her beneficial interest in the property to the husband. That reflected their common intention and mutual understanding. No CGT liability arose in that, following the agreement, she held her legal interest in the property on constructive trust for the husband, who became its sole beneficial owner.

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.