This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our Cookie Policy.
Analytics

Tools which collect anonymous data to enable us to see how visitors use our site and how it performs. We use this to improve our products, services and user experience.

Essential

Tools that enable essential services and functionality, including identity verification, service continuity and site security.

Where Taxpayers and Advisers Meet

Does this sound like a valid Stamp Duty avoidance strategy?

Jaggers
Posts:8
Joined:Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:03 pm

Postby Jaggers » Sun May 25, 2003 11:05 am

I am aware there are a number of different strategies that can be usefully put into practice to try and avoid/delay payment of stamp duty on property transfers. eg. Drop/Double Drop, Nominee Schemes, Title Splitting, Agreement for Lease and Deep in the Money Option to name just a few.

Note that I mean 'avoidance' and not 'evasion'. However I have come across a particular transaction that on the face of it sounds like it may be edging on the latter, i.e. evasion. I simply cannot understand how the structure that has been adopted (and which I detail below) could be a valid scheme. Perhaps someone can offer some ideas?

The transaction:
1. The property is at first wholly owned by a Limited Company
2. In July 1999 the property is sold for £565k to another party by way of two trust deeds, one dated July 1999 (for 2/3rds of the value) and the second in March 2001 for the remaining 1/3rd. The purchaser is the beneficiary under the deed.
3. The deeds themselves are not stamped and the land registry is not told of the sale other than a caution being placed on the title informing them of the trust deed.
4. In December 2002 the title is transferred directly into the name of the purchaser and the consideration is declared to be under 60k - hence no stamp duty is payable.

The net result is that no stamp duty was paid on the transfer (from Limited Company to Trust Deed to individual). My fear is that stamp duty ought to have been paid somewhere along the line. Am I correct in thinking that the Trust Deeds themselves ought to have been stamped?

cheers,
John

paulc
Posts:33
Joined:Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:04 pm

Postby paulc » Fri Jun 27, 2003 1:29 am

I would not be at all happy with such a scheme.

You are right that the trust deeds are themselves stampable. Not a problem in itself as there is no obligation to pay stamp duty. Where the scheme falls apart is in giving the £60,000 certificate of value in the transfer to the purchaser. First, I have serious doubts whether that transaction can be said not be part of a series of transactions or a larger transaction as required under the standard wording. Secondly, if you get over that hurdle, the purchaser can only say that no consideration is given for that transfer by relying on the trust deeds having already transferred beneficial ownership to him. That means relying on a stampable but unstamped document to give the certificate and the Revenue regard that as, let's say, improper - see IR Tax Bulletin Issue 30

Paul


Return to “Stamp Duty, Stamp Duty Land Tax, SDLT”