Tax Appeals Commission determination 10TACD2017 regarding Capital Acquisitions Tax, 2017

• Administrative Decision Number: 10TACD2017
• Year: 2017
• Date: 31 August 2011
• Respondent: REVENUE COMMISSIONERS

10TACD2017

BETWEEN/

NAME REDACTED

Appellant

V

REVENUE COMMISSIONERS

Respondent

DETERMINATION

Introduction

1. This appeal relates to the question of the availability of an exemption in accordance

with section 86 of the Capital Acquisitions Tax Act 2003 (‘CATCA 2003’) commonly

referred to as ‘dwelling-house exemption’. The dwelling-house, the subject matter of

the exemption claim, is located [LOCATION REDACTED]. This property was the

family home of the Appellant, the place where she grew up and where she continued

to reside at all relevant times (hereafter ‘the family home’).

2. The matter at issue in this appeal relates to whether the Appellant is entitled to claim

the exemption or whether the Appellant was, at the date of the inheritance of the

dwelling-house, beneficially entitled to any other dwelling-house or to any interest in

any other dwelling-house in accordance with s.86(3)(b) CATCA 2003.

3. The Respondent, in disallowing the claim for exemption, raised a notice of amended

assessment to Capital Acquisitions Tax on 22 April 2015 in the sum of €[SUM

REDACTED] in respect of the period 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2011. The

Appellant filed a notice of appeal in accordance with s.67 CATCA2003.

2

Facts

4. The Appellant resided in the family home since childhood and cared for her parents

during their illnesses. The Appellant’s father (‘the Testator’) passed away on 27

October 2010. The grant of probate was extracted on 30 May 2011. Assets in the

estate were distributed to the beneficiaries on 17 August 2011.

5. Pursuant to the Will of the Testator, dated [DATE REDACTED], all assets in the estate

were divided in equal shares between the Appellant and her sibling. The Will did not

contain any specific legacies. All property in the estate was bequeathed in accordance

with clause 3 of the Will which provided;

‘I GIVE DEVISE AND BEQUEATH all of my property of every nature, description and kind,

wheresoever situate, to my son [NAME REDACTED] and daughter [NAME

REDACTED] in equal shares for their own use and benefit absolutely.’

6. Where all of the estate of a Testator is bequeathed to one beneficiary or a number of

beneficiaries they are generally referred to as universal legatees however, the

bequest remains a residuary bequest because the debts and expenses of the estate

must be discharged prior to payment out to the beneficiaries, of the assets in the

estate.

7. The parties submitted that clause 3 of the Testator’s Will was in the nature of a

residue clause and that the properties devised therein comprised residuary legacies

and I am satisfied that this is correct.

8. In February 2011, the Appellant and her sibling executed a deed of family

arrangement, the execution of which determined that the Appellant would receive a

100% (as opposed to 50%) interest in the family home and that her sibling would

receive a 100% (as opposed to 50%) interest in a business and business premises in

[LOCATION REDACTED]. Thus the Respondent accepted that the Appellant inherited

an undivided interest in the family home and that her claim for exemption related to

the entire undivided interest therein. The Appellant also inherited from her father, a

share in four other residential properties.