S
Assuming the IT is correct which has not been the case in the past and, I suspect, is not the case here.I note from The Irish Times last Friday that I would not be liable for any CGT, I'm surprised...did anybody else notice this?
They have made extremely basic mistakes on tax and other issues in the past.However, I would be amazed that the Personal Finance editor of the major national newspaper could make such a basic blunder.
Doh!No it is an investment so it is buying and selling.
Sounds totally wrong to me too.The IT said that the last year before sale is ALWAYS treated as owner-occupier so not liable for CGT even for an investment property...this sounds unlikely to me.
This is certainly not correct in the general case. If I own a PPR and then buy and resell an investment property within a 12 month timeframe I cannot claim PPR CGT exemption on the latter because I can only have one PPR at a time. Similarly if I live in rented accommodation and buy and resell an investment property within a 12 month time frame then PPR CGT exemption is irrelevant since the property simply is not my PPR. If the IT literally said this then they are wrong. Maybe somebody could post what exactly was published?What was said that with any property, regardless if you ever lived in it or always held it as an investment property, for the last 12 months of ownership it will always be deemed to be your PPR. So based on that you could have been buying and selling properties within 12 months and have no CGT liability. I have my doubts.
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?