The NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal has denied a taxpayer the principal place of residence (PPR) land tax exemption for a property, and therefore, affirmed a land tax assessment for the 2011 land tax year.
The matter concerned 2 properties owned (or part-owned) by the taxpayer. The Tribunal noted that the “critical period” for examination was the period April 2010 to March 2011. During that time, the taxpayer lived 80% of the time at Property 2 with his de facto partner to assist with renovating that property. The rest of the time, the taxpayer lived at Property 1 with his eldest son. The taxpayer claimed both properties were his PPR and argued that under clause 12 of Sch 1A to the Land Tax Management Act 1956 (NSW), in the absence of a formal election as which one was to be taken as his PPR, there was an automatic default to the more valuable property, being Property 1.
The Tribunal held that on the balance of probabilities, Property 2 was the taxpayer’s PPR and not Property 1, in respect of the relevant year. The Tribunal found the taxpayer had not satisfied the continuous use requirement under clause 2(2)(a) of Sch 1A and that there was no basis upon which the Commissioner could be satisfied that the exemption should be granted under clause 2(2)(b).
(Fenton v Chief Comr of State Revenue [2012] NSWADT 96, NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal, Block JM, 22 May 2012.)
[LTN 101, 28/5]