July 23, 2026
Solicitors
Amanda Perrotton
I saw an email last week (14 July 2026) proclaiming that “The Law Society Has Spoken.” It suggested that residential conveyancers are now under a new requirement to identify complex SDLT matters and have processes in place to deal with them.
That prompted me to revisit the original Law Society publications.
My conclusion? The principles being highlighted today are not new. In fact, they have been part of the Law Society’s guidance and CQS requirements for several years.
The starting point is the Law Society’s Conveyancing Protocol (2019 edition), published on 18 July 2019 and effective from 19 August 2019.
When introducing the revised Protocol, the Law Society explained that:
“The new protocol aims to take account of the ever-increasing complexity of stamp duty land tax…”
It also stated:
“The stamp duty land tax regime has become increasingly complicated. The updated protocol recommends that you seek specialist tax advice if necessary.”
That statement is significant.
It represents a clear acknowledgement by the Law Society that SDLT is no longer a straightforward administrative exercise in every transaction and that specialist tax advice will sometimes be required.
In my view, a reasonably competent conveyancer should therefore be able to recognise when a transaction falls outside routine conveyancing and when specialist SDLT advice ought to be considered.
The position was reinforced when the Law Society introduced the revised Core Practice Management Standards, published on 23 February 2022 and mandatory from 1 May 2022.
Section 5.15 introduced a mandatory requirement for CQS firms to maintain a documented SDLT policy.
Importantly, the requirement extends well beyond simply submitting an SDLT return. Firms are expected to have documented procedures covering matters such as:
To me, this demonstrates that the Law Society regards SDLT as an area requiring formal risk management rather than simply a completion formality.
Neither the Conveyancing Protocol nor the CQS Standards provide a definitive list of “complex” SDLT matters. That remains a matter of professional judgement.
However, I would ordinarily expect firms to consider whether specialist advice may be appropriate where transactions involve issues such as:
Every transaction is different, and not every matter on this list will necessarily require external advice. Equally, there will be transactions outside this list that do.
The Law Society did not suddenly introduce the concept of identifying complex SDLT matters in 2026, nor have they recommended that you should step back from SDLT entirely.
The Conveyancing Protocol recognised the increasing complexity of SDLT in 2019, and since 1 May 2022 CQS firms have been required to maintain a documented SDLT policy as part of their compliance obligations.
For me, the real issue is not whether firms should have processes to identify complex SDLT matters—that expectation has existed for some time.
The real question is whether those processes are robust enough to identify risk early, ensure clients receive appropriate advice and, where necessary, involve advisers with the appropriate level of SDLT expertise.
