Revenue interpretation of PRTB legislation

I had a new tenancy on the 1st September, 2006. I sent off the registration forms late in December and in 2007 they were rejected by the PRTB (PRSI number incorrect). I then sent the forms back. After a long time I noticed I had heard nothing and rang them up for confirmation and they said they had not received the forms. I then had email correspondance on the matter to try and get it resolved and I faxed my copy of the documents to them. Ultimately this was rejected as a solution by a supervisor. I then had to get new forms signed. This was done and sent to the PRTB after 31st October 2007. The registration confirmation was received 6 months later in March 2008.

Do I have to pay tax as my mortgage interest relief is now not allowed?

The tenant is validly registered and late fee paid so I comply with the law in relation to the PRTB, but I somehow still have to pay because revenue has 'interpreted' the rules to mean that on 31st October 2007 when doing the tax return for 2006 I did not comply. Is this a correct understanding of the rules?

What if I did the 2006 return in April 2008 after I was validly registered? Would that be ok?

Also to comply with revenue is it the date you send the forms to PRTB or the date that PRTB sends you confirmation that is relevant?

Was this too complicated to get a reply?

The whole interest deduction and PRTB registration requirement seems full of pitfalls for the unwary landlord. Ultimately, ( and this is only my interpretation ) once PRTB register a tenancy that tenancy should be deemed registered from the date of commencement of the tenancy as stated on the PRTB1 form. . If it takes the PRTB 3 efforts and 9 months to send a confirmation because of the mess of a system they seem to have up there, then that tenancy is still registered and should be considered so since the commencement date put on the PRTB1 form.

The problem comes where one has unregistered or late ( meaning after the Revenue Form 11 return filing date ) registrations. In those instances I would see no budging on Revenues side. It is self-assessment and if the appropriate back-up cannot be provided on audit then any relief claimed by including interest as a deduction would be withdrawn with penalties/interest applying.

Revenue mention in their [broken link removed]that "Evidence of registration need not be submitted with the return of income but should be retained for inspection in the event of an audit. " The guide also states that "For Revenue audit purposes written confirmation of the registration of a tenancy from the PRTB will be accepted as evidence of compliance with the registration requirements for that tenancy."

Interestingly any PRTB letters I have seen do not give the date of registration, only acknowledging receipt of the application and fee and giving the tenancy reference and the tenancy it relates to. So by stating that they accept the PRTB letter, Revenue are missing some of the required information to decide if it was registered with in the timelimits they impose. In order to correlate the PRTB letter with the actual tenancy commencement, you need to look both at the PRTB letter and a copy of the PRTB1.

I agree that some electronic system along the lines of the NPPR would be much better for all. Then again, what on earth would those 40 people in PRTB do all day then?