logo
Can I gift my £330,000 second home to my adult kids without paying tax?

Can I gift my £330,000 second home to my adult kids without paying tax?

Daily Mail​2 days ago

I live in Australia (and am a tax resident here) and I own a leasehold flat in Suffolk that I use when visiting the UK. I no longer wish to own the property due to the doubling of the council tax on unoccupied properties.
Also, the water is muddied with regard to possible liability for UK inheritance tax. There is no inheritance tax here in Australia.
I would like to gift it to my two adult children since I don't need the funds here and they will eventually inherit the property anyway. If I transfer title to them, do they have to pay stamp duty, and if so, at what rate? It is on sale at present for £330,000
Due to the government's war on landlords and buy to let (neither of which applies to me since it is not let out), it will probably not sell at that price.
If stamp duty is levied on the gift, would it be possible to agree a notional sale price of £250,000 in order to fall into the lowest tax bracket, or can it even be exempt from stamp duty since there will be no money changing hands?
They will then become second home owners, so does the transaction incur additional stamp duty? P.A, via email
SCROLL DOWN TO ASK YOUR FINANCIAL PLANNING QUESTION
Harvey Dorset, of This is Money, replies: For many Britons living abroad, its nice to continue to have a base to come back to when you visit. This would be especially the case for you, as your trips from Australia are likely to be for longer periods given the distance between the two countries.
Unfortunately, you tax changes that came into effect last month in Suffolk mean that you are now required to pay twice the standard council tax rate on your property, as it is only 'occupied periodically.'
East Suffolk Council states: 'At a Full Council meeting held in February 2024 it was approved that from 1 April 2025 a 100 per cent Second Home Premium charge will be applied to properties that are furnished and do not have anyone living in them as their main home. This means that 200 per cent Council Tax is payable.'
Understandably, you have decided it is not worth you keeping the property under the current ownership circumstances. Instead, you want to give the flat to your children, which would pass on some wealth and help with potential inheritance tax liabilities.
As you say, there is no inheritance tax in Australia but there is in the UK, meaning your situation is harder to work out. Meanwhile, as discussed below, there are other taxes that you may need to watch out for.
This is Money spoke to two financial advisers to find out what you need to do in order to pass your flat to your children while keeping tax to a minimum.
David Denton, head of technical at Quilter Cheviot, replies: First, from an inheritance tax point of view, your instincts are right to consider future exposure.
While Australia abolished inheritance tax in the late 1970s, UK IHT still applies to most UK-based assets – including property – regardless of the tax residency or domicile of the owner.
So, although you're an Australian tax resident, your UK flat remains within the scope of UK IHT.
That said, with the nil-rate band currently set at £325,000 and your flat valued at around £330,000, the potential liability could be relatively minor, although the nil rate band is frozen until at least 5 April 2030.
Now to the more immediate question of gifting the property to your children. Provided there is no outstanding mortgage on the flat, a transfer of ownership as a genuine gift would not trigger Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) on the part of your children.
SDLT is only payable if there is 'consideration' – for example, if the recipient assumes liability for a mortgage, or pays for the property.
However, even if the transfer is exempt from SDLT because there is no consideration, your children may still face the 3 per cent additional homes surcharge in the future. This wouldn't apply at the point of receiving the gifted flat, but if they later went on to buy another UK property without selling the Suffolk flat, the new home would count as an 'additional property' and attract the higher SDLT rate.
Lastly, you also need to consider capital gains tax (CGT). As a non-resident, you remain liable for UK CGT on the disposal of UK property, even when gifting it. The gain would be calculated as the difference between the property's market value at the point of transfer and its value when you acquired it.
Certain costs associated with the transaction may be deducted, and it's likely that the annual exempt amount of £3,000 would be available, whilst depending on the level of gain, the tax rate could be up to 24 per cent.
Where people often come unstuck is trying to manipulate the value of the property for tax purposes. HMRC normally expects that any transfer – whether by sale or gift – is assessed based on open market value. That means a professional valuation may be required. Artificially lowering the price could lead to tax complications and potentially penalties.
In short, your children won't pay SDLT upon receiving a gift without a mortgage, but there are still IHT and CGT considerations. It's worth seeking tailored advice and a professional valuation to ensure all angles are covered properly.
Check your inheritance tax position carefully
Oliver Loughead, wealth manager at RBC Brewin Dolphin, replies: Transferring ownership of UK property to children is a significant decision that carries various legal, financial, and tax implications, particularly for individuals who are not resident in the United Kingdom.
Regarding inheritance tax (IHT) treatment of the property, for a non-UK resident, IHT will normally be due on UK assets only (subject to new long-term UK residency rules) that exceed the available nil rate band (NRB), which is currently £325,000 per person.
If you have a spouse or civil partner, it might be possible to make use of both of your available NRBs, so £650,000.
Under UK law, a gift of property is typically treated as a potentially exempt transfer (PET). This means that if the donor survives for seven years following the date of the gift, the value of the gift may fall outside the scope of IHT.
However, if the donor dies within that period, the value of the gift may still be brought into account for IHT purposes. In such cases, taper relief may apply, potentially reducing the amount of tax due depending on the time elapsed between the gift and the donor's death.
If you have previously lived in the UK, you should check if you qualify as a long-term UK resident, as your worldwide assets may fall into scope for UK IHT.
You are deemed a long-term UK tax resident if you have been resident for either the previous 10 consecutive years or a total of 10 years or more within the previous 20 years.
Help with financial advice and planning
Financial planning can help you grow your wealth, sort your pension, or make sure your finances are as tax efficient as possible.
A key driver for many people is investing for or in retirement and inheritance tax planning.
If you are looking for help sorting your finances and want to work out whether you need advice, planning, or coaching, the following links can help you understand more:
>Do you need financial planning or financial advice - and is it worth it?
> Financial advice: What to ask and how much it might cost
> Are you retirement ready? Take our quiz and get financial planning help
> Inheritance tax planning - what you need to know to protect your wealth
Regarding concerns around stamp duty land tax, SDLT generally does not apply to gifts of property unless the recipient assumes a mortgage on the property.
In cases where the transfer involves taking over an existing mortgage, SDLT may be charged based on the value of the outstanding loan. Therefore, the structure of the gift - especially whether the property is encumbered - must be carefully evaluated.
Capital gains tax (CGT) should also be considered. Since April 2015, non-residents have been liable for CGT on disposals of UK residential property.
A gift of property is treated as if the donor has disposed of it at market value, even if no money changes hands. This means that any increase in the property's value from its acquisition (or from April 2015 if it was owned before that date) to the date of the gift may be subject to CGT. Non-resident individuals must report and pay any CGT due within 60 days of completing the gift.
The legal process for transferring UK property to children is complex. A UK-based solicitor should be instructed to handle the conveyancing and ensure all necessary documentation is completed, including a deed of gift or transfer deed.
An often-overlooked aspect of gifting property is the potential loss of control. Once the property is legally transferred, the donor no longer holds rights over it unless specific conditions are attached, such as transferring it through a trust.
Establishing a trust can be a useful mechanism to maintain some level of influence over the property while still achieving estate planning objectives. However, trusts introduce their own tax implications and legal complexity, so professional advice is essential before proceeding.
In conclusion, while gifting UK property to children can be a valuable tool for estate planning and wealth distribution, non-UK residents must carefully assess the legal and tax consequences.
Thorough planning, supported by expert advice from UK solicitors and cross-border tax professionals, is essential to ensure that such a transfer achieves the desired outcome without triggering unintended liabilities.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Will Nigel Farage's ‘Doge' project achieve anything useful?
Will Nigel Farage's ‘Doge' project achieve anything useful?

The Independent

time21 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Will Nigel Farage's ‘Doge' project achieve anything useful?

Having impressively seized control of 10 county councils in the recent elections, Reform UK are delivering on their promise to undertake Elon Musk/ Doge -style reviews of the operations of the various local authorities under their command. The first to get the treatment is Kent County Council. Some doubt whether such a comic-opera version of the American exercise is really serious, or if it's just a stunt... Why are they doing this? Well, it was an election pledge, and ostensibly it could save some money that would otherwise be wasted, and make some services more efficient. Nothing wrong with that. Who is on the crack team? It's fair to say that some are quite successful businesspeople, and some, apparently, are IT experts; but, unlike the US Doge brigade, the British team actually includes the new leader and deputy leader of the council, Linden Kemkaran and Brian Collins. It is also fair to say that none of the Reform UK Doge team are able to rival the expertise, let alone vast wealth, of Elon Musk (or, perhaps, the skills of the small group that the world's richest man brought to DC). Nor does the slightly pretentious letter signed by Kemkaran, Nigel Farage and Reform chair Zia Yusuf possess the gravitas of an executive order signed by the president of the United States of America. It contains a good deal of Trumpian menace, but the fact is that Kemkaran is in no stronger a position than anyone would be in a comparable role in local government. So a lot of the Reform/Doge activity, including the 'We mean business' pics, is 'performative', as they say. The full list is: Nathaniel Fried, 'open-source intelligence' guru (head of Doge) Arron Banks, businessman and Reform politician (adviser to Doge) Zia Yusuf, chair of Reform UK Linden Kemkaran, leader of Kent County Council Brian Collins, deputy leader of Kent County Council We shall see how high-powered they are, and also how easily bored. So it is a stunt? Yes, to the extent that any council leader can task their officers with finding efficiency savings, and/or hire consultants to do the same. Plus councils are regularly and independently audited in any case, by law. It's pretty unnecessary, and American Doge was, arguably, an embarrassing flop. Will there be waste, fraud and abuse? It's difficult to believe there won't be any at all, but then again it all depends on what's meant by 'waste'. Was almost the entire USAID budget consumed by waste, fraud and abuse, or did the vast majority of it save lives and serve US foreign policy? In the smaller context of a local authority area, will a flower bed enlivening the town hall, however economical its maintenance, count as essential or a frippery? What about a mother-and-toddler group? Or the green waste collections? Or, in somewhere like Lincolnshire, flood defences? These are, in reality, just routine political choices, and the whole panoply of a British Doge is unnecessary for them to be made. It's also not too cheesy to suggest that waste, fraud and abuse are simple facts of human life; that they exist, sadly, in private enterprise; and that even Musk and Trump have blown a few dollars here and there rather unwisely. What about gold-plated pensions? Most former refuse collectors, ex-leisure-centre staff and retired planners didn't earn enough for anyone to be that envious of their pension, but in any case, they are protected and their payments are contractual. The Doge team could certainly chop future pension entitlements not yet earned by staff, but that wouldn't yield much in the way of immediate savings. They could also freeze or reduce council salaries, and change future pension rules, but with the risk of industrial action and/or not being able to recruit people. The six-figure salaries of senior professionals could also be reduced, but that carries the danger of not being able to find capable replacements, and amateurs are legally only allowed to do so much. What could go wrong? Lots. As anyone with any exposure to local government knows, most of its expenditure is mandated under law – on housing, adult and child social care, and special educational needs. So this is where the major savings could be made. One way would be for contracts with, say, a care home provider to be renegotiated, with no loss of amenity for the residents in terms of their supervision, timely referrals for medical attention, cleanliness, recreation or standard of meals. Or, more crudely, a Doge-style functionary could just chop the value of the contract in half, without much interest in the horrific consequences for those in the homes, or for the children needing special help with their development. Like the Militant-run Liverpool City Council in the 1980s, political posturing and playing with people's jobs and lives could cause real suffering for purely political mischief. In extremis, a local council run by Reform UK that breaches its statutory obligations under the Local Government Act 1972 and other legislation could find itself subject to legal action brought by the secretary of state, Angela Rayner (which they'd no doubt welcome for theatrical purposes). What will Reform Doge achieve? Misery and mayhem, most likely. Yes, they will surely find some minor extravagance, misrepresent valuable programmes, and hype up whatever money they save, playing down any diminution in the services provided. Very much like the real Musk Doge show, in fact. If they do save more substantial sums – enough, say, to cut residents' council tax – then it will probably be at the expense of some highly vulnerable people, and their obligations under the law. The same goes for any attempts to ignore the strictures of the Equality Act 2010, or unlawful action against asylum-seekers, or interference in operational matters in the police force. It could get very messy.

You're NOT a typical working mum, Meghan – you've got a nanny & it's so grating when you whine, expert slams
You're NOT a typical working mum, Meghan – you've got a nanny & it's so grating when you whine, expert slams

The Sun

time23 minutes ago

  • The Sun

You're NOT a typical working mum, Meghan – you've got a nanny & it's so grating when you whine, expert slams

MEGHAN Markle has been slammed by a royal expert for whining about being a typical working mum despite having a nanny. The Duchess of Sussex, 43, admitted in April she had an "amazing" nanny who had helped her look after Prince Archie, aged six, and Princess Lilibet, aged three, for the past five years. 3 3 3 However, an expert has slammed the mum-of-two for "going on and on" about her life as a working mum, despite her "great privilege" giving her access to helpful resources that much of the rest of the world "cannot afford". Speaking on The Sun's Royal Exclusive Show, Royal Correspondent Bronte Coy said she was "frustrated" by Meghan for "overusing" the examples of her motherly responsibilities. The expert explained: "I have a son, but when I hear people from positions of great privilege - where they can afford nannies and a lot of help - go on and on and on about the working mum thing, it's not the same. "Yes, it's time away from your kid - I definitely understand that aspect - but it's not the same as the working mum idea that a lot of the rest of the world has to deal with. "And so she really leaned into that a lot, and I think, well, is this a struggle that you have a lot?" Bronte added: "You do have help. And also you are at home a lot." "I find that a little bit grating." Meghan had admitted in an appearance on The Jamie Kern Lima Show in April that her nanny would step in to help take her children to school. Her admission came just weeks after the Duchess of Sussex said she felt the " juggling" of working and being a mum was " incredibly overwhelming", adding: "Oh my gosh, I just need a break." Adding to Bronte's points, broadcaster and writer Esther Krakue said Meghan was trying "to be this thing that she's clearly not", in relation to her "influencer" status. There's nothing much left of 'erratic' Harry in terms of a man, he's just watching Meghan crack on Esther explained: "I don't even want to feel like we're beating down on everything she does - I genuinely wish her all the success. "But I feel sad that she feels the need to be this thing that she's clearly not. She's not a chemist. She's not a physicist." "But that's fine - sometimes it's OK to just be pretty and to have good fortune in life and to ride that wave." In response, Bronte added that she felt Meghan would be best suited to returning to her lifestyle space, which "she clearly loves." The expert added: "I think that she, I was always hopeful when she leaned into the lifestyle space, clearly she loves that. "I thought maybe we're going to see a more relaxed, casual, real Meghan - I really had hoped that would work - I thought that was going to be a good idea for her. "I have been disappointed by the output, however. "I think it's just not quite landed for a lot of people, particularly now the show is wrapped up." There's nothing left of the man that was Harry, he's erratic and just watching Meghan crack on, expert says Prince Harry is nothing but a shell of his former self as he watches his wife Meghan Markle succeed in her life, an expert has claimed. The Duke of Sussex also appears to be "erratic" in his behaviour, given his latest "random" visit to China, which clashed with King Charles and Queen Camilla's visit to Canada, the expert added. All of this comes while his wife Meghan has engaged in a major re-brand this year, launching her new podcast and finding success with her business As Ever. Speaking on The Sun's Royal Exclusive Show, broadcaster and writer Esther Krakue said Harry's visit to China for his sustainable travel charity Travalyst was done as he "has nothing left". She said: "If you think about it critically, what else does he [Harry] have left? "I mean, he's resigned from Sentebale, while it's being investigated. "He's no longer a working royal, [and while] he has his other charity work with the Invictus Games, his involvement is not as in-depth because it's every few years. "This [Travalyst] is really all he has left." Esther added that Meghan's continued success meant Harry was living in her shadow, leaving him with nothing left of his former self. She continued: "It kind of feels like [this] because there's nothing left. "He's just watching Meghan go from experiment to experiment, you know, taking his kids to school and dropping them off - but really, there isn't much there in terms of the man. "What is the man about?" This comes as the Duchess of Sussex's Netflix cooking show was slammed by an expert for not "being entertaining or informative". The Netflix series saw Meghan making guest baskets, beeswax candles, and a single skillet spaghetti, filmed at a farmhouse near her £12million Montecito mansion. Esther shared: 'There's nothing there. 'She's very, like - I'm not saying this to be horrible - she is not an entertainer or an entertaining person. 'There's not much personality there. 'I never learn anything from her. I love lifestyle shows. I watch them every day. I don't learn anything. I didn't learn anything from hers. And she's just not entertaining. 'She's not a fun person to be around. 'You don't think this is the person I want to go to the pub with to have a pint with. 'It's very clear that she is not box office in terms of entertainment quality.'

Lottery results LIVE: National Lottery Set For Life draw tonight, June 2, 2025
Lottery results LIVE: National Lottery Set For Life draw tonight, June 2, 2025

The Sun

time23 minutes ago

  • The Sun

Lottery results LIVE: National Lottery Set For Life draw tonight, June 2, 2025

THE National Lottery Set For Life numbers are in and it's time to find out if you've won the top prize of £10,000 every month for 30 years. Could tonight's jackpot see you start ticking off that bucket list every month or building your own start-up as a budding entrepreneur? 1 You can find out by checking your ticket against tonight's numbers below. Good luck! The winning Set For Life numbers are: 23, 36, 41, 42, 46 and the Life Ball is 04. The first National Lottery draw was held on November 19 1994 when seven winners shared a jackpot of £5,874,778. The largest amount ever to be won by a single ticket holder was £42million, won in 1996. Gareth Bull, a 49-year-old builder, won £41million in November, 2020 and ended up knocking down his bungalow to make way for a luxury manor house with a pool. £1.308 billion (Powerball) on January 13 2016 in the US, for which three winning tickets were sold, remains history's biggest lottery prize £1.267 billion (Mega Million) a winner from South Carolina took their time to come forward to claim their prize in March 2019 not long before the April deadline £633.76 million (Powerball draw) from a winner from Wisconsin £625.76 million (Powerball) Mavis L. Wanczyk of Chicopee, Massachusetts claimed the jackpot in August 2017 £575.53 million (Powerball) A lucky pair of winners scooped the jackpot in Iowa and New York in October 2018 Sue Davies, 64, bought a lottery ticket to celebrate ending five months of shielding during the pandemic — and won £500,000. Sandra Devine, 36, accidentally won £300k - she intended to buy her usual £100 National Lottery Scratchcard, but came home with a much bigger prize. The biggest jackpot ever to be up for grabs was £66million in January last year, which was won by two lucky ticket holders. Another winner, Karl managed to bag £11million aged just 23 in 1996. The odds of winning the lottery are estimated to be about one in 14million - BUT you've got to be in it to win it.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store