IHT value of tenancy in common share
Series: Farm Tax Brief ; 19(2) March 2004, 3-4(2)Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Summary: Discusses the implications of "Williams' representatives v Inland Revenue Commissioners" (SPC/00392, 11 December 2003). The general principle is that the market value of the share of a joint owner of land is worth less than the relevant portion of the whole. However the Special Commissioner's decision in this case may require a rethink of this assumption. The Special Commissioner held that the value of the deceased's half share should be taken to be less than the mathematical half of the agreed value of the whole. This was decided on the basis that, if the property had been offered for sale prior to Williams' death, the purchaser of the half share would take it subject to the wife of the deceased's right to occupy the property for the rest of her life and that the deceased's half share was worth less than his wife's.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS67779 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 125782-1001 |
Discusses the implications of "Williams' representatives v Inland Revenue Commissioners" (SPC/00392, 11 December 2003). The general principle is that the market value of the share of a joint owner of land is worth less than the relevant portion of the whole. However the Special Commissioner's decision in this case may require a rethink of this assumption. The Special Commissioner held that the value of the deceased's half share should be taken to be less than the mathematical half of the agreed value of the whole. This was decided on the basis that, if the property had been offered for sale prior to Williams' death, the purchaser of the half share would take it subject to the wife of the deceased's right to occupy the property for the rest of her life and that the deceased's half share was worth less than his wife's.