Guide on Alternative Property Finance Relief: Land Sale and Resale Rules

SDLT relief for alternative property finance where a financial institution buys first

This SDLT relief applies to a specific alternative finance arrangement where a financial institution buys a major interest in land, resells that same interest to the customer, and takes a legal mortgage from the customer. Its purpose is to stop the financing structure creating an extra SDLT charge simply because the institution briefly sits between the seller and the customer.

• The relief is based on Finance Act 2003, section 73(1), and only applies if the arrangement follows the required legal sequence.
• The key steps are: the institution buys the major interest first, then sells that same interest to the customer, and the customer grants the institution a legal mortgage.
• It is aimed at a financing arrangement, not any ordinary case where a bank or other institution happens to buy and resell property.
• The term “major interest in land” is important, as the rule applies to a substantial property interest rather than a minor right.
• In practice, care is needed to check that the intermediary is a qualifying financial institution, the same interest is resold, and the documents show one integrated arrangement.
• If the structure uses different legal steps or different security from a legal mortgage, the relief may not apply, so the legislation and transaction documents must be checked closely.

Scroll down for the full analysis.

SDLT alternative property finance: when land is bought by a financial institution and then resold to the customer

This page explains a specific SDLT relief for alternative property finance arrangements. It applies where a financial institution first buys a major interest in land, then sells that same interest to the customer, and the customer gives the institution a legal mortgage. The point of the relief is to prevent the structure from creating an extra SDLT charge simply because the financial institution briefly sits in the middle of the purchase.

What this rule is about

In a normal financed property purchase, the buyer acquires the property directly and borrows money secured by a mortgage. In some alternative finance structures, the legal steps are different. Instead of the customer buying directly from the seller, the financial institution buys the property first and then transfers it on to the customer.

Without a specific relief, that sequence could create two land transactions for SDLT purposes:

• the seller to the financial institution
• the financial institution to the customer

The legislation recognises that, in substance, this may be a financing arrangement rather than two separate commercial acquisitions. The relief is aimed at that situation.

What the official source says

The source refers to Finance Act 2003, section 73(1). It describes an arrangement that must be in place for the relief to apply. The required elements are:

• a person and a financial institution enter into arrangements
• the financial institution purchases a major interest in land as the first transaction
• the financial institution then sells that interest to the person as the second transaction
• the person grants the financial institution a legal mortgage over that interest

The source is brief, but the structure matters. The relief is not for any case where a bank or other institution happens to buy and then resell land. It is directed at a particular financing model with a defined sequence of steps.

What this means in practice

The first practical question is whether the arrangement really follows this statutory model.

You need to see:

• that the intermediary is a financial institution
• that it acquires a major interest in the land
• that it then sells that same interest to the intended customer
• that the customer grants a legal mortgage back to the institution

If those features are present, the arrangement may fall within the alternative property finance rules rather than being treated as an ordinary double sale with no special treatment.

The reference to a “major interest in land” is important. In SDLT, that is a technical concept. Broadly, it means the kind of substantial property interest that can itself be bought and sold as the main subject matter of a land transaction, rather than a minor or incidental right.

The requirement for a legal mortgage also matters. The source does not describe a looser form of security. It specifically refers to the person granting the financial institution a legal mortgage over the interest acquired. If the structure uses a different legal mechanism, the analysis may become more difficult.

How to analyse it

A sensible way to approach this rule is to work through the arrangement step by step.

1. Identify the parties

Who is the person acquiring the property in substance, and who is the financial institution? The relief depends on arrangements between those two parties.

2. Identify the first land transaction

Did the financial institution itself purchase a major interest in the land? This must be a real acquisition by the institution, not just an agreement to fund someone else’s purchase.

3. Identify the second land transaction

Did the institution then sell that interest to the person? The source suggests a resale of the whole major interest obtained. In practice, you would want to check that what is transferred on is the same interest acquired in the first transaction.

4. Check the security step

After the resale, did the person grant the institution a legal mortgage over that interest? This is one of the defining features of the arrangement described in the source.

5. Consider whether the arrangement is genuinely an alternative finance structure

The rule is aimed at a financing arrangement with a particular legal form. If the steps have been altered, split, or supplemented in unusual ways, it may not be safe to assume the relief applies just because the transaction looks commercially similar.

Example

Illustration: A customer wants to acquire a freehold property but the agreed finance structure is that a financial institution will first buy the freehold from the seller. Immediately afterwards, the institution sells that same freehold to the customer. As part of the arrangement, the customer grants the institution a legal mortgage over the freehold. This is the kind of structure the source is addressing.

The relief exists because, without special rules, the interposed purchase by the financial institution could create an additional SDLT charge that would not arise in a conventional mortgaged purchase.

Why this can be difficult in practice

The source is very condensed. It states the core structure but does not spell out every boundary issue.

In practice, difficulties may arise over:

• whether the intermediary qualifies as a financial institution for these purposes
• whether the interest acquired and the interest resold are legally the same
• whether the mortgage requirement is satisfied in the form actually used
• whether the transaction documents show a single integrated arrangement or a series of separate steps

Another practical difficulty is that SDLT reliefs are usually interpreted by reference to the legislation, not just a manual summary. The manual helps explain HMRC’s view, but the statutory conditions remain decisive. If the facts are close to the line, the exact wording of the legislation and the transaction documents will matter.

Key takeaways

• This relief is aimed at a specific alternative finance structure where a financial institution buys land first and then resells it to the customer.
• The arrangement must include the customer granting the financial institution a legal mortgage over the interest acquired.
• The detail of the legal steps matters; a transaction that is commercially similar but legally different may not fall within the rule.

This page was last updated on 24 March 2026

Useful article? You may find it helpful to read the original guidance here: Guide on Alternative Property Finance Relief: Land Sale and Resale Rules

View all HMRC SDLT Guidance Pages Here