ACCA Taxation (TX-UK) (F6) Principal Private Residence Relief
Reader Interactions
Comments
Janossays
Hi,
I am not entirely sure how to interpret the phrase “period when required to live elsewhere”.
From the example it is not obvious whether the fact of moving elsewhere was a individual decision or demand from the employer. Because if it is a first one then the period covered is not deemed as occupied. Or this is not the actual point here?
However it is not really clear for me and it would be great to get an explanation.
Its 9 years till 1st October 2002. Thereafter,its 6 months till 31st March 2003 which is a totall of 114 months. Be careful with the dates and months given
Janos says
Hi,
I am not entirely sure how to interpret the phrase “period when required to live elsewhere”.
From the example it is not obvious whether the fact of moving elsewhere was a individual decision or demand from the employer. Because if it is a first one then the period covered is not deemed as occupied. Or this is not the actual point here?
However it is not really clear for me and it would be great to get an explanation.
Thanks
missheezee says
How did we know it was let for 30 months and actually occupied for 36 months, I get the 3 years part but what about the 33 years part?
shahriar205 says
1/10/1993 – 31/3/2003 lived in it, so actual= 10 years and 6 month = 126 month but why you use 114?
ninsy26 says
Its 9 years till 1st October 2002.
Thereafter,its 6 months till 31st March 2003 which is a totall of 114 months
ninsy26 says
Its 9 years till 1st October 2002.
Thereafter,its 6 months till 31st March 2003 which is a totall of 114 months.
Be careful with the dates and months given