RDRM24020 - Domicile: Illustrative Scenarios: Mr D
From 6 April 2025, the concept of domicile as a relevant connecting factor in the tax system has been replaced by a system based on tax residence. This guidance remains for reference purposes only.
C’s father, D, was born and raised in Northern Ireland, which is D’s domicile of origin. D spent most of his adult life working in various places around the world. In recent years D lived and worked in France, although he made business trips elsewhere from time to time. D died suddenly and a dispute over his will, of which C is one of the executors, has arisen.
In that will D left 40% of his net estate to his partner of the last five years, 20% to C, 20% to C’s sister and the remainder to his favourite charity. C’s two half-brothers, from whom D had been more or less estranged since his divorce from their mother, contend that D was domiciled in France at the time of his death. »Ê¹ÚÌåÓýappy argue that his will lacks essential validity under French law, as it disposes of less than 75% of his estate to his children, and claim a share of the estate. C, his sister and D’s partner assert that D was domiciled in Northern Ireland and that his will is fully valid and effective. D’s partner states that D had never formed the intention of remaining indefinitely in France; the couple had planned to retire to Italy where she would be close to her extended family.
»Ê¹ÚÌåÓýapp dispute ends in litigation, which involves various aspects of private international law, with the court deciding that D was domiciled in Northern Ireland at the date of his death. This court’s decision is not appealed further. HMRC would expect C to accept that Northern Ireland was D’s domicile for the purposes of calculating the Inheritance Tax payable on his estate.
Refer to RDRM20060, RDRM22300, RDRM22310, RDRM22320 and RDRM23030.
Note: this example is illustrative of the position before the introduction of deemed domicile from 6 April 2017. However, D would not have had access to the deemed domicile rules as the court found that he was UK domiciled and not domiciled outside the UK.