serotoninsid
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,754
Is the tenant claiming relief on more or less than the amount actually paid in rent?Revenue come back to him querying the total amount of rental income on the basis that it doesnt reconcile with the amounts tenants have claimed relief on.
I presume that Revenue can look for other evidence of any sort of transaction where they deem it appropriate.Would the revenue be in a position to challenge this fully if there are no receipts in existance?
According to explanation of 'tax relief for tenants'....I thought you had to issue receipts if you participated in the Rent a Room Scheme.
The oasis section on the 'rent a room' scheme clarifies that theres no rent book required under this scheme. I also pulled up a revenue page earlier that said that the landlord 'must provide a receipt when requested by the tenant. To me that means that theres no obligation to provide them if a tenant doesnt ask for them.In order to claim tax relief,......................a receipt for rent you have paid must be provided if and when it is requested by Revenue. This rule applies regardless of whether you pay your rent directly to the landlord or to an agent on behalf of the landlord. Each receipt must show the following:
- Landlord's name, PPS Number and address
- Amount of rent which you have paid
- Period of time covered by the receipt
ClubMan said:Is the tenant claiming relief on more or less than the amount actually paid in rent?
Because, in my experience, sometimes they think that they are right even when they are not. To be fair to Revenue and their staff they are not in the business of deliberately misleading people. But mistakes can and do happen. The bottom line is that the individual taxpayer must take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that their tax affairs are up to date and that they don't make decisions based on flawed or incomplete information.Indeed it can be wrong and often is! I re-iterate, if they're not sure, why don't they just say so and offer to check and come back with accurate information?
I suspect that if you check the relevant legislation (e.g. Tax Consolidation Acts) then you will find that the law is on the side of Revenue with regard to disclaiming responsibility for mistakes that may arise from the dissemination of erroneous information. If you want to change this then start lobbying for a review of the legislation.If a bank, for example, gave out wrong information which cost us money, we have recourse to the law. I don't think it's good enough really to say that Revenue are sometimes wrong .
I suspect that if you check the relevant legislation (e.g. Tax Consolidation Acts) then you will find that the law is on the side of Revenue with regard to disclaiming responsibility for mistakes that may arise from the dissemination of erroneous information. If you want to change this then start lobbying for a review of the legislation.
"Should" being the important point here, at the moment it's not! As you say, if you can't depend on the advice given by revenue who can you depend on? What happens if the professional advice you recieve is also wrong? etc etc.The point is that given the above the onus should be on Revenue to ensure that their staff are fully trained.
Revenue dispense information not advice. If you go to a suitably qualified and regulated tax advisor then you would presumably have some come back if they don't advise you properly."Should" being the important point here, at the moment it's not! As you say, if you can't depend on the advice given by revenue who can you depend on? What happens if the professional advice you recieve is also wrong? etc etc.
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?