UK: Strict deadlines upheld despite perceived unfairness (First-tier Tribunal decision)
The Tribunal’s powers are strictly limited by statute.
The First Tier Tribunal held in Bredin v Revenue Scotland that the statutory time limits in the legislation were clear. The legislation did not give discretion to the Tribunal over the application of these time limits, regardless of harshness.
Background
Each of the UK’s home nations now operates its own property transaction tax:
- Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) in England and Northern Ireland
- Land Transaction Tax (LTT) in Wales
- Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (LBTT) in Scotland
All three regimes include a surcharge for additional residential properties—commonly known as the “second home” surcharge—though rates and scope vary. A universal feature is the ability to reclaim this surcharge if a taxpayer sells their previous main residence within a prescribed period after acquiring the new one.
Each nation sets its own timeframe for selling the old home. SDLT and LTT provide a three-year window, with limited “exceptional circumstances” provisions allowing the relevant tax authority to extend the limit in narrowly defined scenarios, such as fire safety defects or public authority restrictions (now legislated for in Wales for clarity). Scotland, however, provides no discretion for Revenue Scotland to extend this limit and only recently increased its period from 18 months to three years.
In Bredin, the taxpayer purchased a new main residence, paying the LBTT Additional Dwelling Supplement (ADS), intending to sell their previous home within the then 18-month window. Due to market conditions, the sale unfortunately completed just 13 days after the deadline. The taxpayer sought an ADS refund, arguing unfairness, but Revenue Scotland refused, citing the strict statutory time limit.
Tribunal decision
The judge acknowledged the taxpayer’s frustration but emphasised that the Tribunal’s powers are strictly limited by statute as established in the Upper Tribunal decision of HMRC v Hok UKUT 363 (TCC). The judge further stated that the law “does not give the Tribunal or Revenue Scotland the jurisdiction to consider whether there was a reasonable excuse for the delay in selling; the timescale is either met, or it is not.”
Read a February 2026 report prepared by the KPMG member firm in the UK
For more information, contact a KPMG tax professional in the UK:
Mark Richards | mark.richards@kpmg.co.uk
Michael Hope | michael.hope@kpmg.co.uk