Separated but not divorced SDLT question.
Discussion
My wife and I separated around 18 months ago. She initiated a divorce, which reached decree nisi stage. At this point, she decided that she would prefer to stay married. In principle, I've no objection to this. We haven't seen each other for around 9 months, and we live 250 miles apart now.
She's bought a house near her home town. I assume it's in her sole name - it's definitely nothing to do with me, I don't even know where she now lives.
My Google skills are clearly lacking. What I'd like clarifying is the SDLT position if I were to buy another house. Are we linked as long as we're married, such that I'd be liable for the 3% surcharge? If not, how do I go about proving that I'm buying a property in my own right?
She's bought a house near her home town. I assume it's in her sole name - it's definitely nothing to do with me, I don't even know where she now lives.
My Google skills are clearly lacking. What I'd like clarifying is the SDLT position if I were to buy another house. Are we linked as long as we're married, such that I'd be liable for the 3% surcharge? If not, how do I go about proving that I'm buying a property in my own right?
It looks like you CAN avoid it if you can prove you're in the process of getting divorced.
https://goodyburrett.co.uk/when-is-a-married-coupl...
However if both of you are going to remain married then i think the surcharge will be payable.
https://goodyburrett.co.uk/when-is-a-married-coupl...
However if both of you are going to remain married then i think the surcharge will be payable.
Thanks very much. It seems a very grey area. I can see it would be an obvious loophole, but it also seems to penalise people in the situation I find myself.
The impression I get from your link is that I, and my estranged wife, might be subject to an investigation if I happen to buy a house.
The impression I get from your link is that I, and my estranged wife, might be subject to an investigation if I happen to buy a house.
I think the issue is that you and she have for some reason decided to stay formally married. HMRC don't know the underlying reality.
if you can prove that your intention is to get divorced then you don't have to pay the 3% surcharge. However if, 5 or 10 years later, you're still formally married then you can see why HMRC would want the SDLT.
if you can prove that your intention is to get divorced then you don't have to pay the 3% surcharge. However if, 5 or 10 years later, you're still formally married then you can see why HMRC would want the SDLT.
z4RRSchris said:
why stay married.?
It's a good question, also raised by Countdown in more depth. During the process of separation and selling the marital home, I was diagnosed with incurable lung cancer. My wife would prefer to be a widow than a divorcee. I'm aware of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, and I'm as sure as I can be that she won't challenge my will. Even if she does, I'll be dead. It won't affect me in any way.
OP, I have alarm bells ringing in my head but if this your agreed route then fair enough.
If you gave that reason for not wanting to pay the 3% I doubt it would be acceptable because it sounds like a way of enriching a person just before you die.
Money and wills do funny things to people so don’t think that she won’t contest it because in reality you are still married.
If you gave that reason for not wanting to pay the 3% I doubt it would be acceptable because it sounds like a way of enriching a person just before you die.
Money and wills do funny things to people so don’t think that she won’t contest it because in reality you are still married.
s2sol said:
It's a good question, also raised by Countdown in more depth. During the process of separation and selling the marital home, I was diagnosed with incurable lung cancer. My wife would prefer to be a widow than a divorcee.
I'm aware of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, and I'm as sure as I can be that she won't challenge my will. Even if she does, I'll be dead. It won't affect me in any way.
fI'm aware of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, and I'm as sure as I can be that she won't challenge my will. Even if she does, I'll be dead. It won't affect me in any way.
k, sad to hear that. Perhaps optimistically, I have a very high opinion of her. The only reason I'd need to buy a property would be to reduce my estate's IHT liability. I'm just looking at the numbers to see if the 40% of the additional £175k allowance is worth the hassle and cost of actually buying a home. At the moment, it's almost certainly easier to carry on my nomadic lifestyle.
z4RRSchris said:
"lets get divorced!"
- "oh you wont be here for long"
- lets stay married, it financially suits me better.
Although it is harsh, it does read exactly like that. May I ask if you diagnosis was before or after she instigated divorce proceedings?- "oh you wont be here for long"
- lets stay married, it financially suits me better.
Do you have children together? If not I would be inclined to piss it all up the wall in as short a time as possible doing every single thing I had always wanted to do.
Joey Deacon said:
Although it is harsh, it does read exactly like that. May I ask if you diagnosis was before or after she instigated divorce proceedings?
Do you have children together? If not I would be inclined to piss it all up the wall in as short a time as possible doing every single thing I had always wanted to do.
The diagnosis was after we'd mutually decided to part. Initially, she suggested we didn't sell the marital home and stayed together during my illness. It was at my instigation that we ultimately parted, because I wanted to piss it all up the wall as quickly as possible, and I felt I would probably do things she wouldn't like to see.Do you have children together? If not I would be inclined to piss it all up the wall in as short a time as possible doing every single thing I had always wanted to do.
There's a big difference between incurable cancer and terminal cancer, and I may still have a few years, rather than a few months. I can't go too wild.
Edited by s2sol on Wednesday 19th April 17:04
Firstly sorry to hear of your prognosis but a thought to the original question, if your wife’s house is in her name solely (or put in her name solely)and her main place of residence and you buy a property solely in your name as solely your main residence then normal stamp duty applies married or not?
GT4P said:
Firstly sorry to hear of your prognosis but a thought to the original question, if your wife’s house is in her name solely (or put in her name solely)and her main place of residence and you buy a property solely in your name as solely your main residence then normal stamp duty applies married or not?
I'd hope so, and that's what I'm trying to find out. That said, I can see why the revenue would question such an arrangement.s2sol said:
I'd hope so, and that's what I'm trying to find out. That said, I can see why the revenue would question such an arrangement.
Sorry to hear of your cancer findings OP. No ones yet asked if you have any Children to consider during the inheritance process?
I'm just wondering if this may change things from a decision making process
Edited by GT3Manthey on Thursday 20th April 14:18
GT3Manthey said:
Sorry to hear of your cancer findings OP.
No ones yet asked if you have any Children to consider during the inheritance process?
I'm just wondering if this may change things from a decision making process
I've got two children, and the will is sorted. It's really the additional SDLT liability I'm interested in. No ones yet asked if you have any Children to consider during the inheritance process?
I'm just wondering if this may change things from a decision making process
Edited by GT3Manthey on Thursday 20th April 14:18
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff