Commercial Property Focus - November 2009
SDLT & VAT in Property Transactions
Part 1 - Stamp Duty Land
Tax
SDLT is a tax that arises on transactions
involving the sale and purchase of land and the creations of
interests in it such as a lease.
The HM Revenue & Customs website provides
information on rates and thresholds. Although HMRC have not always
kept it up to date, it does contain relevant information about tax
thresholds and also a ready reckoner to help calculate duty on
straight forward transactions.
When considering the tables, it should be
noted that the rates are not marginal. The tax rate shown is the
tax rate on the value of the whole transaction. For example, the
current (Autumn 2009) threshold for payment of duty is £175,000
which means that a purchase of residential property at a price of
£170,000 would attract no SDLT, but the purchase of a house for
£180,000 attracts duty at 1% of the total price amounting to
£1,800.
There are a number of exemptions to
SDLT. One exemption applies to registered social landlords
who can avoid SDLT if certain criteria are satisfied. If the
exemption applies to them, it can be advantageous to developers
entering into agreements with housing associations to acquire and
develop land jointly, as the SDLT exemption may be available to
both parties provided the legal contract is structured in such a
way that the developer rides “piggy-back” on the RSL in relation to
the initial land acquisition contract.
It is necessary however to ensure that
subsequent transactions relating to the development of the land are
not treated as linked for SDLT purposes. The issue of linked
transactions is very important in the context of SDLT
generally.
Linked Transactions
If transactions are linked (that is, they form
part of one larger agreement between the same parties) then the
aggregate value of the transactions is used to calculate the duty
payable. For example, the investor who buys three flats
for £120,000 each under the same contract will be treated for SDLT
purposes as having acquired land under one transaction worth
£360,000 and will therefore pay duty of £10,800.
If the same investor purchases the same three
flats under three separate contracts and there is no commercial
linkage between those contracts (such as a volume-purchase
discount) then there are three separately enforceable contracts at
values below the SDLT threshold and no duty is payable on either of
them.
It should be made clear that purchasing three
flats under separate contracts will not always avoid the linked
transactions rule. If the contracts have the same seller and the
same buyer, HMRC may presume they are linked and it will be for the
buyer to prove otherwise.
To avoid the possibility of multiple purchases
being treated as linked transactions, an investor might set up
three separate companies to acquire each of the three investment
flats.
Even though the companies might be linked by
common ownership, they are separate entities in law and
transactions can only be considered linked where they are made
between the same parties.
Questions of linkage also arise under
development contracts. For instance, if a developer
part-builds a house and then sells the land to a buyer for £150,000
no duty is payable provided the buyer later instructs another
builder to complete the works. However, if when the buyer
acquires the land he also enters into a contract with the builder
to complete the works for an additional consideration of, say,
£50,000, then the transactions will be considered linked and the
buyer will pay duty based on a total transaction value of
£200,000.
On the other hand, however, where a buyer buys
the land from a developer for £50,000 but then, under a separate
contract, awards to the developer a contract to build a new house
on the land for £150,000 then as long as the two transactions are
not linked (for instance, a developer sells land to the Buyer worth
£100,000 for £50,000 on condition that the buyer gives the
developer the building contract) the transactions are not
considered linked for SDLT purposes and the buyer pays no
duty.
The same principle can be applied to
development opportunities. In a recent case a large local
authority wished to acquire a new headquarters building. There were
two separate components to the contract: the land acquisition and
the design and build of the new building. The combined cost
of the two contracts was around £40 million. However, by
structuring the deal so that the land was acquired first for £5
million, and the design & build contract awarded to the
original land owner for £35 million the buyer was able to make a
significant stamp duty saving. In this example, the buyer
saved £1.4 million of duty.
The essential point is that the land
acquisition contract and the design and build contract should form
two separate contracts, whether or not the latter is awarded to the
original land owner.
The leading case from 1992, and still
considered good law, is Prudential Assurance Company Limited v
Inland Revenue Commissioners where HMRC tried to assess duty on the
total transaction price of £10.7m being the actual land price of
£6.1m together with the cost of constructing a finished building.
The tax payer’s appeal was allowed and duty was assessed on the
land price only of £6.1m because the contract for the acquisition
of the land and the contract for the design and build of the new
house on the land had bee separated.
Part 2 - VAT
No-one concerned with the ownership,
development, financing or management of property can afford to
ignore VAT. The recent 15% rate “holiday” is soon to be over
and will shortly rise back up to the previous 17.5% level.
The first thing a prudent purchaser of land
will ask of a seller is whether there has been an election to waive
the exemption to VAT in respect of the property. Such an election
can be made by notification to HMRC by a VAT registered person or
company being the owner of the land.
The effect of an election, in simple terms, is
to turn a contract for the sale of land into a taxable supply for
VAT purposes. Where an election has been made, the seller
will charge VAT at the standard rate, unless the property happens
to be residential in character in which case the charge to tax is
at the zero rate.
If the property is commercial in nature, the
buyer in order to reclaim the input tax will have to be registered
for VAT. This can have an adverse cashflow implication for a
buyer as the VAT payable on the purchase price will have to be paid
to the seller on completion (and the seller will account to HMRC
for it) whereas the buyer will only be able to reclaim that tax at
the end of its current VAT quarter, which may be a couple of months
later.
It is worth noting that Stamp Duty Land Tax is
payable on the VAT inclusive transaction figure.
For instance, if a VAT registered land owner
makes an election to tax in respect of a development site and then
sells that development site for £5m it will (from 1 January 2010)
attract VAT of 17.5% or £875,000. If the Buyer is registered
for VAT it may be able to recover the VAT input tax, but will pay
SDLT on a total transaction value of £5,875,000 ie £35,000.
Despite a number of threats by tax payers to
challenge this rule, the position has not been changed by HMRC.
Elections to tax are made by land owners to
enable them to recover their own VAT input tax. For instance,
in the example above, the seller might have made an election to tax
to recover VAT on demolition or site remediation costs.
A recent change to the rules means that an
election is no longer a “once and for all” election, and land
owners can now reverse an election. However, in this example,
it would not be to the land owner’s advantage because the land
owner would then have to repay the input tax reclaimed on the
demolition and remediation costs.
The VAT rules can work to the detriment of
housing associations and other bodies whose principal activities do
not involve the making of taxable supplies for VAT purposes.
It can be difficult for such organisations to recover VAT input tax
on land purchases. So whilst it might be advantageous
from a Stamp Duty Land Tax point of view for a registered social
landlord to acquire development land (because RSLs often
enjoy a Stamp Duty exemption), they may be at a disadvantage when
compared with other developers in terms of reclaiming VAT on land
purchases.
Finally, there can sometimes be difficulties
in ascertaining whether or not there has in fact been an election
to tax. When buying “distressed stock” from a liquidator or
receiver, the directors of the company in liquidation or
receivership will very often not be entirely co-operative about
producing all relevant VAT records. There can be a difficulty
in getting clear information out of HMRC as to whether or not they
have records of an election having been made in respect of a
specific property.
The difficulty is compounded where a
transaction is done on the basis of a quick deal. In a recent
case, there was evidence that there had been an election to tax by
a previous land owner because a previous transfer found with the
deeds had referred to the price of the land plus VAT on that
transaction being paid on completion. However, on
enquiry, HMRC were unable to say whether they had received any such
election. Eventually after several months of correspondence,
HMRC wrote to say “if a legal entity has not opted to tax land or
buildings the sale of these land or buildings would not be subject
to VAT”. Therefore in the absence of evidence of an express
election by the land owning company, now in liquidation, the
liquidator and the buyer were entitled to assume that the sale of
the land did not constitute a taxable supply for VAT purposes.
David Percival, Commercial Property
Partner, Weightmans LLP david.percival@weightmans.com