Can I Get Stamp Duty Advice by Phone, or Is It Better to Set Out the Facts in Writing?

Introduction

People often want to discuss Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) questions by phone, especially where there are several transactions or the facts feel complicated. In practice, SDLT issues usually turn on precise details such as ownership history, timing, property condition, linked transactions, and whether any relief or surcharge may apply. That is why many advisers prefer the facts to be set out in writing first.

For most SDLT queries, a written summary is the best starting point. It helps the taxpayer explain the facts clearly and gives the adviser a proper basis for answering the question accurately.

The Question

A taxpayer asked whether a call could be arranged to discuss several SDLT issues relating to their circumstances.

Nick’s Explanation

Nick’s response was that, as a general rule, SDLT queries are better dealt with by email first rather than by an initial phone call.

In substance, his explanation was that a written account allows the taxpayer to set out the facts carefully and methodically. It also allows the adviser to reply in writing, creating a clear record of the facts provided and the explanation given.

This is sensible because SDLT advice is highly fact-sensitive. A small detail can change the tax result. For example, the answer may depend on:

• whether the property is residential, non-residential, or mixed-use;
• whether the buyer already owns another dwelling;
• whether the purchase replaces a main residence;
• whether more than one transaction is linked;
• whether any relief may apply;
• whether the dwelling was suitable for use as a dwelling at the effective date of the transaction.

Nick therefore asked for the circumstances and the query to be outlined by email first.

The Law

SDLT is charged under the Finance Act 2003. The amount due depends on the legal nature of the transaction and the facts at the effective date.

In many SDLT cases, the relevant legal rules include:

• Finance Act 2003, section 42 and following, which provide the core charging structure for SDLT;
• Finance Act 2003, Schedule 4ZA, which deals with the higher rates for additional dwellings;
• the statutory rules and case law on whether property is residential, non-residential, or mixed-use;
• the case law on whether a building is suitable for use as a dwelling at the effective date.

Where a taxpayer thinks a property was uninhabitable or not suitable for use as a dwelling, the current legal position must be approached with care. The threshold is now relatively high following Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799. That decision makes clear that disrepair or the need for renovation will not automatically prevent a property from being treated as residential for SDLT purposes.

Analysis

A written enquiry is usually the best first step because SDLT analysis works by applying detailed facts to detailed rules.

In practical terms, the process normally looks like this:

1. The taxpayer sets out the facts in chronological order. This should include what was bought, when it was bought, the price, who bought it, what other properties were owned at the time, and what the property was like on completion.

2. The adviser identifies the legal issues. For example, the issue may be whether the higher rates apply, whether a replacement of main residence exception is available, whether the property was mixed-use, or whether it was genuinely unsuitable for use as a dwelling.

3. The adviser checks the evidence. SDLT outcomes often depend on documents such as the contract, transfer, title documents, lease, completion statement, valuation material, photographs, survey reports, and correspondence.

4. The adviser applies the legislation and case law to the facts as evidenced.

A phone call can be useful later, but if it happens too early there is a risk that key facts are missed, misunderstood, or not recorded properly. That is particularly important in tax matters, where the taxpayer may later need to show what information was provided and what advice was based on.

A written summary also helps avoid common SDLT errors, such as:

• assuming a property is non-residential because it needs work;
• assuming the 3% surcharge always applies when another property is owned;
• overlooking linked transaction rules;
• failing to identify whether a dwelling was actually replaced;
• relying on informal impressions instead of the statutory tests.

In cases involving alleged uninhabitability, the need for a careful written account is even greater. Following Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799, the courts have confirmed that the condition threshold is relatively high. The question is not simply whether the property was unattractive, in poor repair, or in need of modernisation. The issue is whether, at the effective date, it was truly not suitable for use as a dwelling within the meaning of the SDLT rules.

Outcome

The practical answer is that an initial written enquiry is usually the best way to obtain useful SDLT guidance. It gives the adviser the factual basis needed to identify the correct legal issues and provide a reasoned response.

If the matter is complex, a call may still be helpful after the facts and documents have been reviewed. But the safest starting point is normally to explain the position in writing first.

Practical Steps

If you want to assess your SDLT position properly, prepare a short written summary covering:

• the date of purchase or proposed purchase;
• the purchase price;
• the type of property involved;
• whether it was residential, mixed-use, or arguably non-residential;
• the physical condition of the property on completion;
• whether you owned any other dwellings at that time;
• whether you were replacing a main residence;
• whether any part of the transaction involved more than one property or linked deals;
• what SDLT was paid, if any;
• what specific question you want answered.

It is also sensible to gather the main documents before seeking advice, including the contract, transfer, title information, SDLT return, survey, photographs, and completion paperwork.

If your query involves whether a property was unsuitable for use as a dwelling, explain the condition precisely and support it with evidence. Given Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799, broad statements that the property was “uninhabitable” are unlikely to be enough without strong factual support.

Conclusion

For SDLT questions, writing out the facts first is usually the most reliable approach. It produces a clear record, reduces the risk of missing important details, and allows the legal issues to be analysed properly. In tax matters, especially where property condition or higher rates are in issue, careful written facts matter.

Legal References Used

• Finance Act 2003
• Finance Act 2003, Schedule 4ZA
• Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799

This page was last updated on 22 March 2026.

See all questions and answers categorized in this sitemap. Or use Google site search below.