Tag Archives: 2012

Capital Allowance Claims for Fixtures in Second Hand Properties

April 2012 and April 2014 changes to tax law have considerable impact on property transactions which, if ignored, can lead to wasted tax relief.

Since 1996 the extent that a purchaser of commercial property can claim capital allowances on assets within a property has been limited to the disposal value brought into the tax computation by the vendor, or by a previous owner. Purchasers have therefore had to make enquiries into the property’s capital allowance history.

The above led to the introduction of a joint election between the purchaser and seller that state the amount of the sales price that is apportioned to fixtures. The amount specified in the election cannot be greater than the vendor’s costs of the fixtures. Typically purchasers would wish the sum to be high and vendors wish it to be low. The election is often one of the more emotional aspects of purchase negotiations.

The election only covers assets subject to claims from 1996 onwards. This does not prevent purchasers of older buildings identifying assets on which a claim has never been made and making a “late” claim on those assets installed within the building before 1996.

The Finance Act 2012 changes the administrative processes and scope for tax planning.

At present, the joint election is good practice. From April 2012 it is mandatory for the value of fixtures being transferred to be identified. If a joint election is not used then the only alternative is that the Tax Tribunal process determines it for the parties. From April 2012 it has been important that there is certainty as to the transfer value as, unless the value of fixtures is determined, the purchaser (nor any future purchaser) is prevented from making a capital allowances claim on those fixtures.

From April 2014 capital allowance claims will only be possible to the extent that assets have been subject to an earlier claim. This will lead to owners having increased documentation requirements to substantiate claims and purchasers seeking sight of that evidence during the commercial negotiations. A further impact is that it will prevent late claims for pre-1996 expenditure. Taxpayers therefore have until March 2014 to make the first ever claim on pre-1996 property expenditure.

15% SDLT – “Stop the world, I want to get off – well at least until the 2012 Finance Act is passed”

We’re well aware of the recent budget announcement for a 15% SDLT charge on certain property acquisitions, but this created a hiatus period between the budget being announced and the likely passing of the Finance Act in June/July 2012.

Let’s summarise below what the Finance Bill currently states:

  • A punitive SDLT rate of 15% will apply where a residential property costing over £2m is purchased by anything other than a person, eg, a Limited Company. The SDLT rate for a “person” making that same purchase would be 7% so clearly, this has a big impact – even on a £2m acquisition the difference in SDLT is £160,000.
  • When drafting the 2012 Finance Bill, the Government have clearly listened to property developers and so have included a very narrow exclusion for them. The current draft therefore allows those developers who buy the property in the course of a bona fide property development business and for the sole purpose of “developing and reselling the LAND” to pay 7%, and not 15% SDLT.

Furthermore, the property development company must have carried on that business for at least two years before the transaction to qualify.

  • Note the inference that the company must make the purchase with a view to development and resale – not holding for investment purposes. There is no indication as to how any change of intention will be taxed.

There are therefore TWO particular risks for anyone currently making a relevant acquisition:

    1. That there is some change to the drafting of the Finance Bill before it is finally passed that makes the criteria more strict for example, the 2 years standing is increased – this is remote, but a risk nevertheless.

 

  1. That the get out for property developers is narrower than my reading of it would infer. Of specific interest is the word LAND that I have written in capital letters above.

The legislation refers specifically to “reselling the land” but does the re-development of a building count as “land”. I’m sure there is case law around to support one view or the other, and the chances are that this is not as significant as feared – but hey, when we’re talking about £160,000 in SDLT even on a £2m purchase, it would be unwise to ignore this risk.

So until the Finance Act is passed as law, uncertainty reigns supreme and leaves two obvious questions:

– what exactly are corporate developers supposed to do, and

– what does this do to the high end residential property market?