A CGT liablity shouldn't generate a loss. By definition, you only have a CGT liablity if you make a gain on sale (i.e. you sell for more than you bought) and the CGT liability will only be a fraction of that gain. Even after paying CGT, you'll still trouser more money than you laid out to buy the property.I would like to sell quickly but can't afford a loss and will have to hold out for more money if I need to account for CGT . . .
In that case CGT is irrelevant other than recording the loss in order to hopefully write it off against future capital gains.When I factor in all the costs, including extensive work to garden, I will prob make a loss overall
Thanks but if the costs are not allowable, I will lose some of the money I've spent on property since purchase unless the increase in price is more than 150% those costs if you see what I mean (33% goes to CGT). Thanks all the same.In that case CGT is irrelevant other than recording the loss in order to hopefully write it off against future capital gains
No, I don't understand at all.if you see what I mean
Untrue.unless the increase in price is more than 150% those costs if you see what I mean (33% goes to CGT)
There are ways around that.although they were real costs really incurred, you don't have any paperwork, well, that's a known drawback of incurring costs that aren't properly documented.
?Edmundo, I think you're cactus.
Of course it's possible. Very few property owners for example will have receipts for significant enhancement expenditure incurred a number of decades ago but these are routinely claimed in CGT computations and there are ways and means of obtaining corroborative evidence to substantiate such claims.it may be possible to claim a deduction for unvouched expenses
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?