Related posts · 8 posts

Two people sell the same home after the same ten years. One pays 2.62m, the other 14.23m. Holding is not what separates them.

“Exempt up to 1.2bn” is right. The sentence that usually follows is not — crossing it does not put the whole gain into tax.

Sell above KRW 1.2bn as a one-home household and a sixth step appears — apportionment. It is why crossing the line does not mean a big bill.

The Act subtracts assumed debt, and the Decree names the rental deposit as one. One paragraph later it presumes that between spouses and lineal relatives the debt was never assumed.

Almost every write-up says “here is what changes from 2027.” But this goes to the National Assembly on 3 September. One axis runs through all of it — not how long you held the home, but how long you lived in it.

Income Tax Act art.110 turned up a rule the earlier version missed: two or more preliminary returns in a year revive the final-return duty.

Trading up gives you three years; caring for a parent and marriage give ten. And trading up carries a second requirement almost nobody mentions.

The ₩2.5m allowance for overseas shares comes from Article 103, not the foreign-asset provisions. One allowance across all “shares etc.”, separate from property — and unused, it simply lapses.