A Russian financier has lost a tax dispute over his £5.75million London home after claiming the property was partly commercial – meaning he paid a vastly reduced level of stamp duty.
Andrei Tretyakov, who loves entertaining, purchased the 5,000 square foot, converted bacon-smoking factory in June 2021.
But he quickly became embroiled in a row with the taxman over a possible bill of half a million pounds, The Sunday Times first reported. A tribunal has now upheld the bill.
The millionaire was accused of wrongly claiming the ground floor of the building – which features a 900-bottle wine cellar, pool room and private bar – was a commercial premises.
This meant he paid a heavily reduced level of stamp duty.
According to HMRC, estate agency Nest Seekers International had made no suggestion the property was fit for business use.
‘The current owner has, quite frankly, gone to town. We are talking about a 40 foot private bar and games room,’ it said.
The agent, based in New York, also branded the property in general as a ‘staggering conversion’ and ‘perhaps one of the finest properties for entertaining that we have ever listed’.
A Russian financier has lost a tax dispute over his £5.75million London home (pictured) after claiming the property was partly commercial
Andrei Tretyakov (pictured) purchased the 5,000 square foot, converted bacon-smoking factory in June 2021
But Tretyakov, founder of the hedge fund Blue Wire Capital, purchased the property at a £1.2million discount on its £6.95million asking price and paid a ‘mixed-use’ stamp duty rate of £277,000 instead of the full rate of £761,250, reports said.
In court, Tretyakov’s legal team claimed he paid less stamp duty partly because Nest Seekers International told him he did not need to pay the full rate.
However, nothing in its sales literature confirmed whether this was the case.
Joseph Adunse, a tax partner with accountancy firm Moore Kingston Smith, said the fact Nest Seekers International highlighted the ground floor’s use as a party area was crucial to the final decision.
The case marks the latest in a string of battles between wealthy taxpayers and HMRC over what kind of property falls under a ‘mixed use’ residence.
An HMRC spokeswoman said: ‘We welcome this decision, which confirms our position that the building was purely residential and the higher rates of SDLT applied.’