[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

August 10, 2005 - 10:40 pm

I have it in my notes that Adelaide Bank will consider 5 units on one title @ 80%. Westpac and NAB may also do it.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

August 10, 2005 - 10:34 pm

To contradict the advice that I have written in my API articles… I would think it would be ok to go with the P&I offset option.

I say this because if you are only going to live in the property for a year or so then you’re not really going to repay a lot of principal in the first year of a loan – but you have the benefit of an offset which may save you more money (depending on your income and spending habits). You can accumulate any surplus funds in the offset.

Steven, it’s probable that the lender that they want to use doesn’t offer an IO Offset (e.g. NAB!).

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

July 21, 2005 - 10:53 pm

Why do you want to know this?

When someone asks how to make a bomb they are either just interested or they want to blow something up.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

July 3, 2005 - 7:07 am

I totally disagree with you Caston.

See http://www.prosolution.com.au/articles/howmuch.pdf See page 3 & 4 of the article.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 30, 2005 - 8:29 am

Maximum amount you can borrow is 105% for a purchase (not refinance).

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 28, 2005 - 2:44 am

Hi Mick

In your example, your wife will have to grantee the loan (unless you are using a cash deposit and your income is enough to service the debt).

I wrote an article for API mag about borrowing in trusts – see http://www.prosolution.com.au/articles/structure3.pdf

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 23, 2005 - 11:50 pm

SA has also make some changes effective 1 July – http://www.revenuesa.sa.gov.au/circulars/c255.html

However, Bob Carr decides to buck the trend and introduce stamp duty for refinances for loans > $1m. The States had to eliminate stamp duty because of the new GST revenue. NSW seems to be the only one dragging the chain!

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 19, 2005 - 10:58 pm

Commercial, $16 million, 100% finance. You are joking right?

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 18, 2005 - 6:40 am

Come on Del, you should know better than that…

You will have to ask.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 17, 2005 - 12:59 pm

I believe that ANZ will do a 95% refinance.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 16, 2005 - 4:42 am

Mobile phone retailers thought trail was the main point of the exercise in the 90’s… and that’s why most of them went bust. The main point of the exercise is to make money and stay in business. For a new brokerage firm that means getting you hands on upfront commission to pay for upfront costs. Too many brokers are too trail focused.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 14, 2005 - 10:46 pm

They will aggregate loans if you have over $500k of borrowings.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

June 1, 2005 - 8:50 am

Think about the ongoing viability of the aggregator becuase it they go out of business then you lose your trail. How can a business pay 120% and be viable?

I use PLAN and they are the best (I think). I have used AFG and they were poor.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

May 27, 2005 - 8:59 am

Solicitors have a fiduciary duty to act in their client best interest. They will only be directing where the money is to be paid (i.e. to the vendor, State revenue office, surplus back in your account). If, for some reason, they direct the monies be paid to themselves they must deposit the money into a trust account (which solicitors must maintain). If they take your money and run you can claim on their Professional Indemnity insurance. The usual election is to select “as directed by my solicitor”.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

May 25, 2005 - 8:08 am

You are spot on. It doesn’t matter that you get a tax deduction. It is still money in the banks pocket not yours. Silly logic. If you donate all your money to charity you’ll get a tax deduction but you’ll be poor as well.

One point is the tax deductible debt is half the cost of non-deductible debt (if you’re on the highest tax rate) because you can offset the cost against other income.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

May 21, 2005 - 12:05 am

If you borrow the money in your personal name you could lend it to the trust and charge interest. The interest that you charge the trust would be assessable income and you could claim the interest you pay the bank as a deduction.

Kiwi, your signature is bordering on advertising. Can you tone it down a bit so that is not so blatant? Information such as occupation, website, email, etc are ok but yours goes too far. Thanks for your understanding.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

May 17, 2005 - 7:24 am

Yer, that would work (as long as beneficiaries or directors and property owners are the same people).

This would be similar to borrowing the money yourself and lending to the trust at the same rate you are paying. It would be neutral tax effect personally (expense = income) but the money would be deductible to the trust (as long as the funds are used to earn assessable income).

Either way would work.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

May 17, 2005 - 2:33 am

Hi Rob. A trust in not a legal entity so trustee borrows on behalf of the trust. However, essentially the trust is the ultimate borrower from a tax perspective. I just say “loan in trusts name” so I don’t confuse too many people.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

May 16, 2005 - 11:06 pm

Yes, you could have a loan in the trusts name and a security in your personal name.

However, it wouldn’t make much sense from a tax perspective. Run this past your accountant.

Cheers

Stu

[Stuart WemyssMember@stuart-wemyssJoin Date: 2003Post Count: 598]

May 10, 2005 - 11:28 pm

Yes, ability to contact & return calls. Plus a real desire to sort out issues/problems/mistakes when they arise. Only 2 things that have to be good at.

Cheers

Stu