Although Caprice claims to have a full-time accountant working in her office, they were either kept in the dark about an interview she was giving to the Financial Times or they don’t know what they were doing.
Caprice, rather stupidly, proudly announced:-
“I have been interested in property since my mid-20s, when I invested in government repossessions both here and in the US. After careful research, I would select a place, hold on to it for two years – so I did not have to pay capital gains tax – then I would fix it up and flip it. I made a lot of money doing this, sometimes doubling my original outlay.”
In order to qualify to any residence relief, the supermodel should have been a resident in these houses for some of the time.
She would not have been required to live there FULL TIME but must have lived there for at least some of the time.
Another point which comes to light, which is often forgotten about, is that if a person buys property with the intention of selling them for a profit is that the profits would then be subject to income tax – not capital gains tax.
For someone of Caprice’s stature, we would assume they would fall into the 40% tax bracket rather than the 17% capital gains tax charge.
We would be surprised if HMRC ignored such a high-profile interview, although Caprice may have luck on her side as dwindling HMRC staff numbers may render it difficult for HMRC to pursue such a public confession.