Zakaat to recepients;shares,necessities,bonds

Question ID: 28423

As Salaam u Alaykum.

Referring to the downloadable brochures on your website -“Basic info Zakaat 1” states that it is necessary to inform the recepient that you are giving him/her Zakaat, “Zakaat made easy” states that it is NOT necessary to inform the recepient that he/she is being given Zakaat. Can you please provide clarity as to which is the correct ruling?

When one invests in shares, it is usually to earn a return, which could take the form of dividends/profits as well as capital appreciation. Similairly when one invests in property (assuming that it is not the persons primary residence) it is usually for rental income as well as capital appreciation. However, when calculating Zakaat, for shares one considers the market value of the shares (presumably dividends may have been received and would be in your cash balance), while for property one only considers the rental income received. What is the reason that these investments appear to be similair in the manner in which the investor requires returns, yet the method of calculating Zakaat on them is different.

I understand that Zakaat is not levied on domestic necessities, but on wealth. One could argue that the basic necessity is one simple, reliable car and a simple, comfortable house of a certain value. It appears that there is no Zakaat on motor vehicles (not held for sale) or on a person’s home used for residence. If one has for example five luxury cars, but naturally only uses one at a time, then should the assumption be made that even though the person is not trading in cars (in the business of buying and selling cars), then Zakaat should be taken out on the value of these cars?

I understand that interest bearing bonds are not permissible. When calculating Zakaat, when one deducts one liabilities, should one deduct only those payments on the bond that are due and payable in the next twelve months or should one take off the full outstanding amount of the bond.


Marked as spam
Asked on September 14, 2008 12:00 am
Private answer

1) No neccessary opinion is correct.

2) The share value goes up and down.
The property rental goes up and thus Zakaatable

3) The statement of living varies from one to another, one man's luxury is another mans discomfort.

4) The liability is bond instalment x12

Marked as spam
Answered on September 14, 2008 12:00 am