Property Tax Deadlines Remain Strict Despite Fairness Arguments, Tribunal Confirms
Tax tribunals cannot bend statutory deadlines simply because the outcome appears unfair — a point reinforced by the recent decision in Bredin v Revenue Scotland. The ruling highlights the limited discretion available to tribunals in property tax disputes and serves as a practical warning for taxpayers navigating surcharge refund rules.
Devolved property taxes under scrutiny
Across the UK, each home nation operates its own property transaction tax regime. Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) applies in England and Northern Ireland, Land Transaction Tax (LTT) in Wales, and Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (LBTT) in Scotland. All three systems impose a surcharge on purchases of additional residential properties — often referred to as the “second home” surcharge — while allowing refunds if the buyer sells their previous main residence within a specified period.
However, the timeframe for selling the former home varies by jurisdiction. SDLT and LTT generally provide a three-year window and include limited “exceptional circumstances” provisions that may allow extensions in narrowly defined situations. Scotland has historically taken a stricter approach. Although the LBTT deadline has recently been extended from 18 months to three years, the legislation does not give Revenue Scotland discretion to extend the time limit.
It was this rigid statutory framework that formed the backdrop to the Bredin appeal.
The Bredin decision
In Bredin v Revenue Scotland, the taxpayer purchased a new main residence and paid the LBTT Additional Dwelling Supplement (ADS), intending to sell their previous home within the then-applicable 18-month window. The sale ultimately completed 13 days late due to market conditions.
The taxpayer sought a refund of the ADS on fairness grounds, but Revenue Scotland rejected the claim. The First-tier Tribunal upheld that refusal, finding the statutory time limit to be clear and leaving no room for discretion.
The judge acknowledged the taxpayer’s frustration but stressed that the Tribunal’s powers are strictly defined by legislation, referring to the Upper Tribunal’s decision in HMRC v Hok UKUT 363 (TCC). At paragraph 30, the Tribunal stated that the law does not permit consideration of a “reasonable excuse” for missing the deadline — the statutory timescale either is met or it is not.
Consistent approach across cases
The outcome in Bredin aligns with other recent decisions. In White v RS [2024] FTSTC 7, the Tribunal similarly confirmed it could not extend LBTT ADS deadlines on fairness grounds. Likewise, Secure Service Ltd v HMRC UKFTT 59 (TC) rejected a late SDLT multiple dwellings relief claim, reinforcing that the 12-month amendment window is fixed.
Tax authority guidance reflects the same position. HMRC’s manual (ADML3200) states that officials must apply the law correctly and cannot depart from it simply because the result appears unreasonable.
Why this matters for businesses and advisers
The practical takeaway is clear: missing a statutory property tax deadline — even by a small margin — can permanently block relief claims and lead to avoidable tax costs.
For finance leaders, property investors and advisers, the decision underscores the importance of closely tracking disposal timelines where surcharge refunds are expected. In Scotland in particular, the absence of discretionary relief means compliance risk is higher if transactions drift beyond statutory limits.
Limited routes once deadlines are missed
In some cases, judicial review may be available to challenge whether a tax authority has acted unlawfully in applying the legislation. However, this is a specialist and uncertain route and will not usually rescue routine late claims.
The safer course remains proactive deadline management. As Bredin demonstrates, tribunals are unlikely to intervene where Parliament has set clear time limits.
Bottom line
The Bredin ruling reinforces a long-standing principle in UK tax law: statutory deadlines in property tax regimes are applied strictly. For taxpayers and their advisers, careful monitoring of disposal windows is essential to avoid losing valuable surcharge refunds.
