时间：00:00:00
Emma purchases an investment property which she intends to renovate and sell at a profit. In order to avoid Capital Gains Tax, she has the property transferred into the name of her daughter, Rachel (who does not own a property and can therefore take advantage of the exemption applied to residential property). After Emma has agreed on a sale, Rachel refuses to transfer the property to the purchaser, claiming that it belongs to her. Which of the following statements best describes the position?
< 上一页
对/错
下一页 >
The correct answer is D. Emma has made a contribution to the purchase price of the property. The presumption of advancement would normally apply in these circumstances as Rachel is Emma's daughter. However, the presumption can be rebutted if there is evidence that Emma did not intend to give Rachel the beneficial interest. In this case, Emma's intent to use Rachel's name for tax benefits and Rachel's refusal to transfer the property back are indicative of a presumed resulting trust, which can rebut the presumption of advancement.
Key Point: The presumption of advancement can be rebutted with evidence showing that the transferor did not intend to gift the beneficial interest, leading to a presumed resulting trust in favour of the transferor.
收集问题
用户内容
