Why is Zakat not obligatory upon the owner of a palace, despite his wealth, while it is obligatory upon me for the money from selling my apartment because it is not enough for my needs, when it was originally a necessity of life?
The majority of scholars do not stipulate that zakatable wealth must be in excess of basic needs for to be obligatory. Zakat becomes obligatory on wealth if it meets its conditions (complete ownership, stability, and being free from a debt that reduces the ). However, some Hanafi jurists are of the opinion that wealth must be in excess of basic needs. Other scholars have objected to this view, asserting that zakat is obligatory on cash whether it is held for growth or for expenditure. This is the view preferred by Ibn Abidin and Al-Haskafi.
As for a palace intended for dwelling or a rented apartment, zakat is not obligatory on their value because they are not zakatable assets intended for growth. However, zakat is obligatory on the rent of the apartment if it reaches the nisab and a full year has passed over it.
Summarized from the full answer at Ftawy · imported
Read the full answer on Ftawyhttps://ftawy.com/en/questions/188891
Where this answer came from
- Source platform
- Ftawy
- Original fatwa ID
- 188891
- Imported
- Translation status
- Source text, unreviewed
- Read the full ruling
- Read the full answer on Ftawy