Feedback - Working at home

01 August 2001 / Ian Young , I R S Shore , Karen Deus , Richard Bramwell Qc , John Hayward

Issue: 3818 / Categories: Forum & Feedback

In Taxation, 10 May 2001 at page 132, an item of correspondence suggested that principal private residence relief could not be restricted where the property is used partly for the purposes of an employment. An editorial note put forward a contrary argument based on the fact that there is still use for the purposes of 'a business' even where that business is that of an employer.

In Taxation 10 May 2001 at page 132 an item of correspondence suggested that principal private residence relief could not be restricted where the property is used partly for the purposes of an employment. An editorial note put forward a contrary argument based on the fact that there is still use for the purposes of 'a business' even where that business is that of an employer.

I raised this same point with Technical Division in the mid 1980s in connection with the Inland Revenue Practices and Concessions book which I still edit and which is now published by Gee/Sweet & Maxwell.

My understanding of the Revenue position is explained in the Commentary to the item which is classified as FRP2/CGT4/2 and which uses as its text an extract from leaflet CGT 4. I do not believe this is still current but I have seen...

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Subscribe Now...

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.

Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.

Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.