Unused Section 23 rural renewal relief

C

circularrd

Registered User
Messages
17
I bought a Section 23 property in Co. Leitrim in 2003 which has been let continuously since then. I have not needed to claim the S.23 relief (as covered elsewhere). It's outside the ten year clawback period - although this doesn't seem to be relevant in my case since it's unclaimed. If I sell the property, can the new purchaser claim the unused relief of c.€139K? If so it would help greatly - advice appreciated.
 
Are you sure about that? My understanding was that if a property is sold more than 10 years after its first let, whether relief has been claimed or not, then the purchaser can't claim any relief. I could be mixing up different reliefs.
 
The 10 years refers to the period for which the property must be let.

As the OP did not need to use any of the s23 relief, it is available to the purchaser.

The relief to the purchaser is limited to the relief that would have been available to the OP.

TCA 1997 s 372AP
 
Sorry if I got the above wrong, it's been a long time since I was involved in any tax relief for property.

Just for my own education, and apologies for being a bit slow on this, but could someone explain what I've obviously read it wrong in the Revenue Guidance note - Section 11 of the attached.
[broken link removed]
 
There is no doubt from reading the relevant section that you are correct the relief ends after 10 years.My accountant told me that the revenue
position was subsequently revised to allow relief to continue to be claimed after the ten year period.I am not able to find any reference to this anywhere on the revenue website.I have claimed relief after ten years on a section 23 property and up to now it has not been queried by the revenue.I think i will keep my head down and fingers crossed.
 
After looking at my returns for 2015 i now see that my relief was claimed on a student apartment which comes with section 50 relief.I also own section 23 property.Section 50 relief comes under 23 umbrella but with some differences,one of which i hope is no 10 year restriction.
 
If your property hadn't been rented prior to you purchasing it, it's a completely different scenario to the OPs query.
 
Red Onion, I am once again not at all certain that either scheme is available for only ten years.I agree that the start of the tax break begins on renting
the property but i also have been advised that the revenue have amended the length of time that you can avail of the relief up to as long as it takes
even if it exceeds ten years.Hopefully one of the accountants that frequent Askaboutmoney can clarify.
 
lukas888 said:
Red Onion, I am once again not at all certain that either scheme is available for only ten years.I agree that the start of the tax break begins on renting
the property but i also have been advised that the revenue have amended the length of time that you can avail of the relief up to as long as it takes
even if it exceeds ten years.Hopefully one of the accountants that frequent Askaboutmoney can clarify.
Click to expand...

Thank you for all of your views..the Revenue Guidance Note section 11 quoted above seems clear that in my situation no S.23 relief will carry forward to a new owner even if unclaimed by me which is the case. However as Lukas888 mentions above if anyone can confirm otherwise do let us know.
 
Well, obviously, I bow to Revenue's interpretation.

The only nagging thing is that I cannot see in the legislation where a sale of the property outside of the 10-year period negates its qualifying status.

Perhaps someone else can see it.

The definition of qualifying premises is contained in section 372AM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top