Forum Replies Created

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Profile photo of chalkeychalkey
    Participant
    @chalkey
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 7

    Wow – 2 trusts – now *that* is interesting.  Given as what I've already got is a discretionary trust  owning the land, it also sounds significantly less expensive to set this up than anything else as well.  Ignorring for a moment the capital gains and tax-on-resale issues: this kind of advice (if it works out!) stands to cut $1M off the price of what I'm doing.  Words can't express how grateful I am for all this kind help!! 

    Profile photo of chalkeychalkey
    Participant
    @chalkey
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 7

    Constructing from abroad seemingly changes some rules – so for example – while Australians need to pay "commercially reasonable rent" to live in a company house – that may not be the case in the foreign countrys tax system.  Same goes for capital gains tax and company/income tax on proceeds of an eventual sale.  There are a stackload of disadvantages though; it would be tough to set this up without it looking like a "scheme" (anti-avoidance problems), paperwork doubles, accounting costs double, all the rules triple (not only needing knowledge of Aus tax+building law, but also Foreign laws for these, as well as the additional area of foreign investment laws/regulations).
    The idea only occurred to me because the source income for the house is already coming from overseas.

    Quote:
    If you want the business to pay for some of the costs, then this can be done by diverting income to a new trust for example.

    My best understanding of Div 7A is that trusts are no longer (since 2008) beneficial in terms of costs or tax releif?  To move money from a business into a trust, it either needs to go out as a loan (needing eventual repayment, plus interest, all taxed), or be distributed to the beneficiarys (tax at full personal marginal rates).  Do remember though: I am not an expert.

    Profile photo of chalkeychalkey
    Participant
    @chalkey
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 7

    I just had another thought… FIRB

    I wonder if there's any advantage to my overseas establishment being the actual entity that constructs the house?  The general purpose of overseas investment is described on their web site: "The Government seeks to ensure that foreign investment in residential real estate increases the supply of dwellings and is not speculative in nature." – so I clearly qualify.  I think there's also some chance that GST doesn't apply either?  I don't think suppliers are supposed to charge GST to overseas buyers.

    Man this stuff can get complicated!
    http://www.firb.gov.au/content/real_estate/residential.asp

    I can't even begin to imagine what happens in regards to capital gains or even income tax in the case of an eventual sale either…

    Profile photo of chalkeychalkey
    Participant
    @chalkey
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 7

    "Capital Cost" – you're spot on once again – I had no idea about any of this, and the law makes it crystal clear that I can't get any useful deductions when constructing anything with my residence in it.  Actually – not really "crystal" at all – that's some of the worst gobbldegook legislation I've ever seen… but it's clear to me nonetheless.  http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/s43.1.html

    I'm very glad you pointed this out – I'm back to the private ruling in favor of my overseas "Branch Profits" treatment in order to make any sense out of this.  If anyone's interested – I'll come back in in a few months, and post the outcome of my application and any comments/experiences to go with it.  I've another appointment in 7 days with another accountant about this stuff again, so I'll post an update after that too.

    Profile photo of chalkeychalkey
    Participant
    @chalkey
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 7

    Hi Terryw – WOW – thanks for such a detailed reply!!!

    Overseas tax: if I did this, I'd obtain a private ruling beforehand; I'm not interested in anything illegal!  My situation is extremely unique – my income is 96.5% untainted, and my business is a PE: 100% located in and automatically operated from overseas – qualifying me for the "Branch Profit" treatment (section 23AH) or the summary here: http://tinyurl.com/288kbed – the treatment applies equally to listed and unlisted countries, with the exception that the term "Permanent Establishment (PE)" is defined by the foreign countries legislation in listed countries, rather than by our legislation (clarifyable by a private ruling) for all others.
    I think this is not relevant however; profits that accumulate in my business untaxed can only "get out" via unfranked dividends or PAYG, so they end up getting taxed as normal anyhow.  My assumption is that if the "profits" get spent by the business on house construction – they're not "profits" anymore – they instead reduce my assessable income down to zero – so it makes no difference whether the money was non-assessable in the first place, if there's none left over to be assessed on at the end?

    Ownership: the land is owned by a discretionary trust presently – my wife and myself are the beneficiaries.  Interesting to hear about Cummins!!  Stamp duty on transferring this doesn't bother me too much; I can work out how much that will cost, and I am hoping to be able to work out how much benefit might come from any transfer, so I'll just choose whichever option "costs less".  (eg: If, hypothetically, it's possible and legitimate for us to pay no rent on the house, in exchange for the business being allowed to construct on my Wifes land; this might save us $8.5k/year in the tax on the rent we're not having to "pay".  That's in the same ballpark as stamp duty anyhow, so that small upfront cost saves us loads in long term expenses. I said "hypothetically" deliberately – I'm pretty sure this exact situation would *not* be legitimate; but I'm hoping to find out what *would* be legitimate, and how much it would cost).

    US company: I don't have any established US structure – merely "servers in racks."  That said – should I *be* sued by an American, and loose, I'm of the vague understanding that if I merely ignore it and choose never to go to America – there's nothing they can do about it.  I say "Vague understanding" – this advice was accurate (and cost me $30,000 in US legal fees to obtain) 8 years ago.  I'm *assuming* it's still current.

    Terryw wrote:
    If the company is providing you with living space then there are fringe benefit issues.

    Can you elaborate on what these issues are, and in particular, can you think of situations where it would be permissible for the business to charge the tenant less rent (in some way that avoids the tenant or business paying extra tax of course)?  Do you know any good "fringe benefits for dummies" resources I could peruse?

    CGT exemption loss: Yes – I'm aware of this drawback – and the even bigger problem of the entire sale amount being "stuck" in the business and subject to full marginal tax if "extracted" later.

    PPOR and land tax: I'm a newbie, and didn't even know land tax existed.  It seems that in QLD, no tax is payable for land worth less than $350K (companies) or $600K (individuals).  I assume their idea of VOLA roughly matches the councils idea (on my rates notice), so I'm way below those thresholds already.  Thanks heaps for mentioning this one!

    Terryw wrote:
    There may also be corporation Act issues such as directors duties not to personally profit at the expense of the company etc.

    Yikes!  This sounds like a deal-breaker.  Do you know more about this?  Myself and my wife are 50%/50% company shareholders, and I'm the director.  Do these "Issues" apply to private companies?  By "Issues" – do you mean that ASIC or someone could sue me (deal breaker!), or, do you mean that a if a shareholder sued me – I'd loose? (non issue – I'm not going to sue myself).  Is this anything that anyone could "find out about" if neither shareholder ever complained about it?

    Terryw wrote:
    For the business question it would be the party contracting with the buyer who gets the income.

    Interesting answer; I own a patent, which could relatively easily be transferred to a new company to build the house, so licence fees might make sense – and that might hopefully provide some asset protection too.

    It sounds like you have a great depth of experience.  I'm very grateful for your answers – thanks!!!!

     

    Profile photo of chalkeychalkey
    Participant
    @chalkey
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 7

    Hi "quickchick",

    Yes – good thinking, that zoning issue.  The property is one acre zoned rural (top of a mountain).  There are council rules that I am able to abide by, so yes – all is fine on that front.  If I want to expand in future, I expect that's not impossible:  A nearby firm of architects have a similar setup to what I want – and they've got a lot of staff.

    Quote:
    And it sounds like you intend to build a very nice home/office combo.

    I hope so!!  I'm not so young anymore, and all my friends have jobs and houses etc – while all I've got is my leisure and businesses (and an empty acre so far).  I've got some catching up to do!!!

    The land is currently owned by my trust.  It was during the course of my most recent tax return that I came to notice that my instructions to my accountant didn't seem to match up with what they'd set up (they promised asset protection, and I see a huge company loan accumulating to the trust.  That's obviously not what I was expecting when I said "asset protection").  Anyhow – to cut a very long story very short – I've spent about 20 hours over 2 months talking to about 10 different accountants so far, and I am seriously less than inspired by any of them so far. It's just starting to dawn on me that these folks perhaps don't know too much about any of this kind of thing – as bizarre as that may sound?  It *seems* relatively simple to me;  shuffle some paper, and cut the build cost of my house by *over* 50% all-up.  All those accountant meetings later, and I still can't figure out why none of the earlier ones mentioned this, nor why the most recent one didn't endorse this (relatively new #B) idea of mine when I raised it.

    Possible future sale isn't something I'm too worried about (nor really interested in; the home is suitable for retirement) – I showed a photoshop mockup to an agent and he said he'd have no problems selling it.  Good idea to think of that possible catch too tho.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)