Forum Replies Created
What names is your existing PPOR in? If in joint names, lower income earner sell half share to higher income earner who borrows $200K, interest on this is tax deductible. Lower income earner puts $200K down on new PPOR, and you borrow $130K tax deductible.
Or form a discretionary trust which buys existing PPOR and you guarantee the trust's borrowings using your new PPOR. You will need to consider ongioing costs and other expenses such as land tax.
You have not considered CGT consequences on sale of investment unit. But you could do the same therre by one buying the other out.
Best idea you need to spend half an hour or so with a solicitor specialising in conveyancing. Make sure you take all documentation and correspondence.
Why don't you talk to your bank about putting enough of your spare money down on a term deposit as additional security so that you don't need to pay LMI
The definition seems clear enough:
A person is the spouse of another person if they are legally married, or they are living together as a couple in a de facto relationship within the meaning of the Property (Relationships) Act 1984. If the Chief Commissioner is satisfied that, at the time of deciding an application for a first home owner grant, an applicant is legally married but not cohabiting with the person to whom the applicant is legally married, and has no intention of resuming cohabitation, the person to whom the applicant is legally married is not to be regarded as the applicant's spouse. Note: There is no minimum period of cohabitation which defines a de facto marriage under the Property (Relationships) Act 1984.
De facto relationships
(1) For the purposes of this Act, a de facto relationship is a relationship between two adult persons:
(a) who live together as a couple, and
(b) who are not married to one another or related by family.
(2) In determining whether two persons are in a de facto relationship, all the circumstances of the relationship are to be taken into account, including such of the following matters as may be relevant in a particular case:
(a) the duration of the relationship,
(b) the nature and extent of common residence,
(c) whether or not a sexual relationship exists,
(d) the degree of financial dependence or interdependence, and any arrangements for financial support, between the parties,
(e) the ownership, use and acquisition of property,
(f) the degree of mutual commitment to a shared life,
(g) the care and support of children,
(h) the performance of household duties,
(i) the reputation and public aspects of the relationship.
(3) No finding in respect of any of the matters mentioned in subsection (2) (a)-(i), or in respect of any combination of them, is to be regarded as necessary for the existence of a de facto relationship, and a court determining whether such a relationship exists is entitled to have regard to such matters, and to attach such weight to any matter, as may seem appropriate to the court in the circumstances of the case
If you are in any doubt about your situation pay a lawyer who practises in family law to give you advice.
Two examples.
1. Taxable income afterr tax deductible losses on property is greater than zero, there is no tax loss to carry forward
eg Income $20,000Losses $19,000
Taxable income $1000 There is no loss to carry forward
2. After deduction of losses there is a tax loss
eg Income $20000
Losses $21000
Net Loss $1000 – $1000 can be carried forward as a loss until your taxable income is greater than zero
You can only claim deductions for negative gearing or whatever in the tax year they happen ie you cannot wait to claim them till asubsequent tax year
There are two separate issues:
1. What did your searches show when you purchased the property? When did the Council decide it was going to put a road through there? If the Council had issued a written statement before the date of Contract then this should have been disclosed in the Contract pursuant to the Conveyancing (Sale of Land) Regulation. and potentially if you can show you have suffered loss you may have a claim against your conveyancer or the vendor. You would need to seek legal advice.
2. The Council can basically put what conditions it likes on consents. If you consider conditions are unreasonable you can appeal to the Lnad and Environment Court. Prima afcie if either of the houses is going to get access using the new road both the council conditions would normally be reasonable. But again you should get advice from a lawyer or twon planner
ANSTAT would seem from a Google search to be an agency that does various property enquiries that would normally be done in a purchase. $450 for lawyers is cheap, certificate of currency is for insurance (or at least in NSW it would be) to ensure the body corpotrate has the required insurance policies
Get the agent to provide the rental history for the last 3 years. These are older units. My view generally (ie in rural NSW) is that there is a demand for cheaper flats that are well maintained. My view with Coona is that it is a good solid town – the rural industries are balanced with the national park and observatory. Generally a safe rainfall area. Have a look at the main street and the cross street Dalgarno. Are there many vacant shops? Improvements to the Newell Highway are making Coona less of a natural midway point for stopping between Brisbane/Gold Coast and Melbourne which might affect motel occupancy rates.
Generally speaking demographically the larger regional cities are growing in population, and the smaller towns are declining. But I would think average household size is also declining ie population decline does not necessarily mean a decline in housing demand.
I think Coona is much safer than towns west of the Warrumbungles. I think your average occupancy rate will depend on the condition the flats are in and how well they are maintained. If the agents think you can get a higher rent – a 10% gross return would equate to $108 a week get them to show you similar flats ie age, construction that are getting those rents.
I spent a number of years in Coona but have not had much to do with it over the past 8 or 9 years.
No and Yes. Some tenants want a pool. If they have experience looking after it that's sweet, otherwise negotiate a higher rent to cover the cost of pool service. Your insurance premium will be slightly higher.
As the agent has introduced the purchaser during the period of the agreement the agent is entitled to commission even if the sale contract is entered into after the agency agreement expires
Possibly a deemed dividend or a taxable fringe benefit
Do a search of posts by member posting them in this instance search for posts by C2.
One of them is this thread
https://www.propertyinvesting.com/forums/property-investing/general-property/4320150
If the property is rented out when you first buy you can only claim it as a PPOR from when you move in. Julia Hartman suggested a strategy that might reduce or eliminate CGT in API last year
Mal Park is the Australian authority on partial adverse possession. His doctoral thesis looks at each state http://www.csdila.unimelb.edu.au/publication/thesis/MMP_PhD_Thesis.pdf of course there may have been changes since he wrote this
boostdef wrote:We have 1 sibling.What is the relevance of how many brothers and sisters you and your partner have to your ability to obtain finance?
Why is a buyer going to purchase your company structure when there will presumably be a potential capital gains tax liability on the properties the company owns when the company sells the properties ie say company purchased properties for $600K and you are selling the co for $800K, also the purchaser won't get benefit of 50% discount on properties owned in company structure
As I said in jest at a party last night "You can always tell someone from Queensland but you can't tell them much"
Have you got a lease with your tenant? If you have that would be end of story. Your company title gives you a right to occupy a certain part of the building. You are receiving money for giving someone the right to use your property. That is rent according to ordinary concepts. What you are getting is not a dividend, because a dividend is paid to a shareholder by a company. The difference with company title is that you are not going to be able to claim building write off because the building is owned by the company. So yes you declare the rent as income, and claim interest on any loan used by you to purchase the company title irrespective of what property the loan is secured against and claim any other ongoing expenditure you have had to make.
In any event Section 317 of the 1936 Income Tax Assessment Act seems to put this matter to rest. "lease" includes a sublease and, in relation to a company title interest in land, includes an agreement similar to a lease or sublease.
An agreement similar to a lease would be a licence.
How much is your accountant charging you? I hope not much when 10 minutes googling gives you an answer.Read the lease. Go through it clause by clause with your solicitor. The lease is your contract as landlord with the tenant and is what counts.
Has the tenant put in writing that they would vacate the house if you had to give vacant possession on settlement? Would the tenant expect you to contribute to their removal costs?
