It's a unique situation Wilko. On the one hand it's good news – your property might be worth more than you thought On the other hand, no one wants to fork out more than they should to the govt.
I'd follow Terry's advice and put together a letter with some supporting evidence such as the sale contract and other comparative sales from the RP data report.
i just get confused a bit …..check it out… does it matter really that your IP is negatively geared or has zero gearing (ie rent equals loan repayments) as the tenant (other people 's money) is paying the loan anyways…. and even at the end if hold for lets say 10years and then sell even at the same price as you bought… you still will make money as most of it was paid by the tenant….are we just being greedy here???!!!!!! INVESTEC
If the property is negatively geared during the time of ownership – and is sold for the price it was purchased for, the owner would have lost out on all the holding costs during the time the property was owned. There's also purchase costs such as stamp duty that need to be considered.
If it was neutrally geared- but didn't move in value, then it's a pointless asset to own.
9 years is a very long time – and it's hard to accurately plan ahead.
DHA leases can seem like a good idea for those starting out and worried about potential rental vacancies. However, a long lease like this can be very prohibitive for the owner. The biggest issue is that if you need to sell up – your restricting your pool of buyers (because you'll probably need to uphold the lease). Secondly, not all lenders like them – some won't lend above 80% Lastly, the management fees can be quite high.
All in all, there's pros and cons – you just need to weigh them up in terms of your longer term plans.
I like Margaret Lomas as an investor. I think her books are worth a read and I think she's making a genuine effort to regulate the property advisor industry. I can't speak on behalf of Destiny (I don't know what they offer) but I personally believe it's best to keep some functions of the property purchasing process separated to avoid any potential conflicts of interest – such as the financing and property locating aspects.
You need to have some sort of formal lease agreement in place in order to use the IP rent as income. You could get by on using a rental appraisal from a local property manager – but it would need to be appraised as a normal rental and not a share house.
Having you on the application is likely to reduce the overall borrowing capacity as your annual income of $10k is less than what the banks believe it costs for an individual to meet a minimum standard of living.
I haven't crunched the numbers but your partners income would certainly help. Whether or not you'd want to involve all parties in the transaction is another story.
How much are you looking to spend on the next IP and how much rent do you think it will receive?
Whatever you do, don't submit any more applications until you're reasonably certain of receiving a good outcome.
Also consider your longer term goals. If you're looking to purchase multiples properties in the future – you might want to spread those funds further than the first IP.
Firstly, I wouldn't use tax reduction as the main driver for buying an investment property. Reducing your tax bill means spending a $1 to get back 40 cents. The tax incentives with property investing are great – but should only been as a bonus and not the main motivator.
Instead, look for a property that fits into your longer term plans. It could be something that you could renovate/develop, something that you believe will experience decent capital growth, cash-flow or a combination of the two. This isn't an exhuastive list – there's plenty of other reasons why investors purchase particular properties.
On a separate note – have you considered doing both? Buying a PPOR and an IP? I wrote this article for Australian Property Investor mag on this topic. Here's the link.
With loan structuring you want to ensure that your properties aren't cross collaterised (something that banks love to do) and you select the right lenders at the right time as you continue to accumulate investments so you don't burn your borrowing capacity too soon.
Without sounding biased – you should consult with a decent finance person that has experience in this area so you can worry about locating properties while they sort out the finance structure.
Whether you sell or keep the property comes down to the costs of holding relative to achievable growth.
For instance, if it's costing $5k a year to keep – you'd want to be reasonably confident that you'll recoup this via capital growth over the long term.
Look at current market conditions, future infrastructure plans and any other key drivers that could add to growth when deciding whether to keep.
If you decide to keep both – structure the loans carefully and avoid crossing.
It's a good question. I know it's a mundane response but advice on retrospectively claiming costs against income is one that I'd put to your accountant. If you need a recommendation for one in you're area than it wouldn't hurt starting a new post.
The right structure comes down to your long term plans. If you were my client – I would have discussed setting up everything as interest only and parking your spare cash in an offset attached to one of the properties. I also would have avoiding crossing up the properties.
Given that you've got two loans with WBC – I'd more than likely have you set up with the prem advantage so you can take advantage of a rate discount and offset account.
Get a formal lease in place. Even if your friends – you need to treat it as a business.
I'd also grab a depreciation schedule. Call up a quantity surveyor in your area and they might provide you with a general estimate on how much you're able to claim.
Which city are you in? You might be able to get some recommendations for a decent accountant here. That's not to say that you need to be in the same location as your accountant though – if you're comfortable with phone/email you can choose your accountant from anywhere.