AIP Funding From Dividends or a Property Sale: Connecting the Evidence
Using company dividends or property-sale proceeds for an AIP application requires more than showing today's bank balance. Explain lawful acquisition, ownership and how the asset became funds available to the applicant. Owning company shares does not make the company's entire bank balance a personal deposit. A property's sale price is also different from the net amount available after liabilities and other ownership interests.
Start by identifying the particular assets and amounts to be nominated. Do not add all family or group-company wealth together as though it belongs to one applicant. Gifts and inheritances have separate evidence questions; this article addresses business distributions and property realisation so those different legal relationships are not hidden under one general label.
Connect the company distribution to the shareholder
INZ's evidence examples for dividends include bank receipts, shareholder distribution certificates, board resolutions and tax records. Establish the shareholding, income background, genuine distribution and recipient. Several years of accumulated business value should not be described as a single year's employment income.
If more than one company is involved, use a clear entity index to show the relevant rights and transactions. A group revenue total is not evidence of an individual's available assets. Where the resolution identifies one recipient but payment reaches another account, explain the actual arrangement rather than copying the resolution figure into a source-of-funds table and ignoring the discrepancy.
Keep a proposed distribution, an approved but unpaid distribution and funds actually received as different states. An accountant can review figures and the distribution record, while the immigration professional assesses the evidence needed. A broad financial-capacity letter does not replace missing ownership or receipt documents.
A property sale needs a history before settlement
INZ lists examples including title, a recent valuation, purchase and sale agreements, mortgage information and evidence of the funds accumulated to buy the property. The sale and receipt establish realisation; the acquisition evidence explains how the asset was originally obtained. Long ownership does not automatically remove the need to explain that earlier history.
Show the gross price, mortgage repayment, costs, other owners' interests and the applicant's actual or expected net proceeds. Avoid counting the same value once as property and again as cash. A transaction not yet settled should remain labelled accordingly. A valuation is not completed sale proceeds, and an old offer does not guarantee the amount ultimately available.
Make valuations and gaps explicit
The official evidence page says asset valuations must be three months old or less when the application is made and produced by an external, reputable agency. A family's preferred asking price or internal worksheet is not a substitute for an appropriate valuation. Include the relevant ownership share, liabilities and limitations instead of selecting only the highest figure.
For missing bank or company records, identify the period, likely record holder and recovery attempts. A current explanation should carry its genuine date and identify the underlying documents. Do not create backdated resolutions or payments that never existed. Tax consequences require appropriate tax advice; preparing immigration evidence does not determine an individual's exemption or reporting obligations.
Finish with an index a reviewer can follow
Link each nominated amount to ownership, lawful formation, realisation and receipt, retaining original currencies and dates. Use the same factual record across professional reviews. If the amount changes because of liabilities, settlement or exchange rates, update it transparently rather than keeping a convenient earlier number.
The eventual transfer is another task governed by INZ and the relevant banking and local-law requirements. A well-supported source does not make every remittance method acceptable. Give the adviser readable originals and a concise gap list so requests address real missing evidence rather than simply increasing the size of an unstructured folder.
Official sources and verification date
18 October 2026
Comments