Inheritance tax (IHT) was introduced almost 20 years ago and
broadly charges to tax certain lifetime gifts of capital and
estates on death.With IHT came the concept of ‘potentially
exempt transfers’ (PETs): make a lifetime gift of capital to an
individual and, so long as you live for seven years from making
the gift, there can be no possible IHT charge on it whatever the
value of the gift. The rules create uncertainty until the seven
year period has elapsed but, at the same time, opportunity to
pass significant capital value down the generations without an
IHT charge. Of course this is to over simplify the position and
potentially ignore a whole host of other factors, both tax and
non-tax, that may be relevant.
However many people are simply not in a position to make
significant lifetime gifts of capital. There are a number of
reasons for this, the most obvious being that their capital is
tied up in assets such as the family home and business interests
and/or it produces income they need to live on.
Gifting the Family Home?
But what is to stop a gift of the family home being made to,
say, your (adult) children whilst you continue to live in it?
The answer is simple: nothing! However such a course of action
is unattractive not to say foolhardy for a number of reasons the
most significant being:
- security of tenure may become a problem
- loss of main residence exemption for capital gains tax
purposes
- it doesn’t actually work for IHT purposes.
The reason such a gift doesn’t work for IHT is because the
‘gift with reservation’ (GWR) rules deem the property to
continue to form part of your estate because you continue to
derive benefit from it by virtue of living there. This is a
complex area so do get in touch if you would like some advice.
Getting around the rules
To get around the GWR rules a variety of complex schemes were
developed, the most common being the ‘home loan’ or ‘double
trust’ scheme, which allowed continued occupation of the family
home whilst removing it from the IHT estate. For an individual
with a family home worth say £500,000 the prospect of an
ultimate IHT saving of £200,000 (being £500,000 x 40%) was an
attractive one.
HMRC’s response
Over time the schemes were tested in the courts and blocked for
the future.
However HMRC wanted to find a more general blocking
mechanism. Their approach has been somewhat unorthodox with the
GWR rules remaining as they are. Instead a new income tax charge
is levied on the previous owner of an asset if they continue to
be able to enjoy use of it. The new rules are referred to as the
Pre-Owned Assets (POA) rules. They are aimed primarily at land
and buildings but also apply to chattels and certain interests
in trusts.
Scope
In broad outline, the rules apply where an individual
successfully removes an asset from their estate for IHT purposes
(ie the GWR rules do not apply) but is able to continue to use
the asset or benefit from it.
Example 1
Ed gave his home to his son Oliver in 1999 by way of an outright
gift and Ed continues to live in the property.
This is not caught by the POA rules because the house is
still part of Ed’s IHT estate by virtue of the GWR rules.
Example 2
As example 1 but Ed’s ‘gift’ in 1999 was made using a valid
‘home loan’ scheme.
This is caught by the POA rules because the house is not part
of Ed’s estate for IHT.
Even if Ed did not live in the property full-time because say
it is a holiday home, the rules would still apply.
If Ed had sold the entire property to his son for full market
value, the POA rules would not apply, nor would the GWR rules.
The rules also catch situations where an individual has
contributed towards the purchase of property from which they
later benefit unless the period between the original gift and
the occupation of the property by the original owner exceeds
seven years.
Example 3
In 1999 Hugh made a gift of cash to his daughter Caroline.
Caroline later used the cash to buy a property which Hugh then
moved into in 2005. The POA rules apply.
The rules would still apply even if Caroline had used the
initial cash to buy a portfolio of shares which she later sold
using the proceeds to buy a property for Hugh to live in.
If Hugh’s occupation of the property had commenced in 2007,
the POA rules would not apply because there is a gap of more
than seven years between the gift and occupation.
There are a number of exclusions from the new rules, one of
the most important being that transactions will not be caught
where a property is transferred to a spouse or former spouse
under a court order. HMRC have also conceded that only cash
gifts made after 6 April 1998 can be caught within the rules.
Start date - retrospection?
Despite the fact that the new regime is only effective from 6
April 2005, it can apply to arrangements that may have been put
in place at any time since March 1986. This aspect of the new
rules has come in for some harsh criticism. At the very least it
means that pre-existing schemes need to be reviewed to see if
the new charge will apply.
Calculating the charge
The charge is based on a notional market rent for the property.
Assuming a rental yield of, say, 5%, the income tax charge for a
higher rate taxpayer on a £1 million property will be £20,000
each year.
The rental yield or value is established assuming a tenant’s
repairing lease.
Properties need to be valued once every five years. In
situations where events happened prior to 6 April 2005, the
first year of charge will be 2005/06 and the first valuation
date will be 6 April 2005 with the next valuation due on 6 April
2010.
The charge is reduced by any actual rent paid by the occupier
– so that there is no charge where a full market rent is paid.
The charge will not apply where the deemed income in relation
to all property affected by the rules is less than £5,000.
The rules are more complex where part interests in properties
are involved.
Avoiding the charge
There are a number of options for avoiding the charge where it
would otherwise apply.
- Consider dismantling the scheme or arrangement. However
this may not always be possible and even where it is the
costs of doing so may be prohibitively high.
- Ensure a full market rent is paid for occupation of the
property - not always an attractive option.
- Elect to treat the property as part of the IHT estate –
this election cannot be revoked once the first filing date
for a POA charge has passed.
The election
The effect of the election using the example above is that the
annual £20,000 income tax charge will be avoided but instead the
£1 million property is effectively treated as part of the IHT
estate and could give rise to an IHT liability of £400,000 for
the donee one day. Whether or not the election should be made
will depend on personal circumstances but the following will act
as a guide.
Reasons for making the election
Where the asset qualifies for business or agricultural property
reliefs for IHT.
Where the value of the asset is within the IHT nil rate band
even when added to other assets in the estate.
Where the asset’s owner is young and healthy.
Reasons not to make the election
The life expectancy of the donor is short due to age or illness
and the income tax charge for a relatively short period of time
will be substantially less than the IHT charge.
The amount of the POA charge is below the £5,000 de minimis.
The donor does not want to pass the IHT burden to the donee.
The election must be made by 31 January in the year following
that in which the charge would first apply. In other words if it
would apply for 2005/06 the election should have been made by 31
January 2007. HMRC will however allow a late election at their
discretion.
What now?
The new rules undoubtedly make effective tax planning with the
family home more difficult. However they do not rule it out
altogether and the ideas we mention below may be appropriate
depending on your circumstances.
Sharing arrangements
Where a share of your family home is given to a family member
(say an adult child) who lives with you, both IHT and the POA
charge can be avoided. The expenses of the property should be
shared. This course of action is only suitable where the sharing
is likely to be long term and there are not other family members
who would be compromised by the making of the gift.
Equity release schemes
Equity release schemes whereby you sell all or part of your home
to a commercial company or bank have been popular in recent
years. Such a transaction is not caught by the POA rules.
If the sale is to a family member, a sale of the whole
property is outside the POA rules but the sale of only a part is
caught if the sale is on or after 7 March 2005. There is no
apparent logic in this date.
The cash you receive under such a scheme will be part of your
IHT estate but you may be able to give this away later.
Wills
Wills are not affected by the regime and so it is more important
than ever to ensure you have a tax-efficient Will.
Summary
This is a complex area and professional advice is necessary
before embarking on any course of action. The new POA rules are
limited in their application but having said that they have the
potential to affect transactions undertaken as long ago as March
1986.
How We Can Help
Please get in touch if you have any questions or would like some
IHT planning advice.
For information
of users: This material is published for the information of clients.
It provides only an overview of the regulations in force at the date of
publication, and no action should be taken without consulting the
detailed legislation or seeking professional advice. Therefore no
responsibility for loss occasioned by any person acting or refraining
from action as a result of the material can be accepted by the authors
or the firm. |