I’m no expert, but it so happens that just a few days ago I calculated the material cost for a 4.2 x 3.8 room on a concert slab with a tiled roof and it was near 10k, all materials were top quality and at retail.

Must of been a really small room ( 3 x 3 ) and very, very cheap fixture for the kitchen and ensuite to do all that building work for around 15k. ?????

saving money is easy!! I just havent mastered it yet is all. []

As for the car question..no matter the make cars are expensive to run. With older models the parts become more expensive as they become rarer but they ARE easy to understand. With newer cars, one little accident is going to set off multiple gadgets you have no hope of understanding, screw with the cars electrical chip and leave you wondering why why you didnt buy a 1973 volkswagon.

May I suggest you buy a horse…..? []

Im boring…Im in retail. [|)]

*thinking I should have lied and posted something impressive like Brain surgeon or Rocket Scientist”

~ Heaven doesnt want me and Hell is afraid I will take over ~ :þ

Crashy at the risk of sounding like a broken record let me reiterate:
Time value of money reduces the effect of depreciation reduction of your cost base. Also I still haven’t received a sensible answer on whether depreciation of fittings reduces your cost base like the div 43 building depr’n.
PLUS: You only pay tax on half of your CG!

I would like to see a good analysis of typical +ve and -ve properties with the full tax effect involved, and what would really be interesting is to include a value for our time in the comparison. As I stated above, my input in time has been minimal. I’m sure I would have spent a much larger amount of time in securing an equivalent amount of +vely geared properties. I value my time at at least $23 per hour, and that’s not including travelling costs.
Jim

Maybe posting on here wasn’t a good idea and lead to cutting your own throat ?[]

Noel’s article was in today’s Sunday Mail, but it was a bit vague on the specifics. He explains the difference between prime cost and dim. value on fittings, and then writes: “But if you sold the depreciated asset the proceeds would have to be included in your taxable income” He then writes that “sellers might want to incorporate a schedule that apportions the sale price between the building and the fixtures and fittings to minimise the tax they pay on sale”. He adds that the buyer is not bound by this schedule, and they are free to use the figures obtained from their Q/Surveyor.
He writes about the building write off being deducted from the cost base, but does not mention the words “cost base” in relation to fittings, only what I wrote above.
So… I’m no wiser after this article. Come on all you accountants, can you please clarify all this for us????
Thanks, Jim.