by maths on Sat Mar 13, 2010 5:26 pm
I am a little bemused by Ray Coman's comment.
A gift, by definition, involves donative or gratuitous intent.
You cannot therefore make a gift without either donative or gratuitous intent.
It is possible to effect a transfer of beneficial title not intending the transaction to constitute a gift; to do so requires no donative/gratuitous intent. If such proves to be the case (ie no donative/gratuitous intent proved) the only consequences are that no issue of a gift with reservation arises re IHT and, for CGT purposes, the disposal is not then treated as having taken place at market value (as it does not constitute a gift or a non-arm's length transaction; ignoring connected person transactions).
I may have misunderstood what Ray Coman intended; perhaps he could reply?
With respect to the question any gift to a "stranger" is a disposal for CGT assumed to have taken place at market value; there are no limits.
Re IHT, there are limits if the gift is intended to be, for example, an exempt gift (ie no IHT). Otherwise an unlimited gift to another individual constitutes a PET and no IHT arises unless giver dies within 7 years thereof.