Why is it recommended not to buy property in your own name?

Says who??

Regards
Michael

As Michael says there is no right or wrong way and each clients circumstances and requirements are different.

What is right for one will not necessarily be right for someone else.

Must admit i have never heard Steve say buying in your own personal name is the only way to go.

Cheers

Yours in Finance

Several reasons not to buy in an individuals name:
1. No asset protection
2. No tax streaming benefits
3. Difficult to bring in additional partners
4. little flexibility in transferring to a related entity such as a SMSF
5. Forms part of your will on death and wills can be challenged.
6. overall little flexibility.

Here are my view points:

1. If you get sued personally, your personal asset will be a risk being taken away from you including your investment property including your house if ALL registered under your name. That is why it is advisable to separate your business transaction with personal transaction.
   
2. In contrast,if someone sue you personally, and if your investment property was purchased under a company name, the suer cannot get his hands on your investment property only your personal assets. And if your personal assets are registered under your wife's name for instance, your assets are safe.
   

My advise is control your assets but don't own them (i.e., buy them under a company's name, YOU being the director of your company to control them).

Hope that makes sense.

Good luck.

The mantra of many highly successful investors is to 'Own nothing, but control everything'.

As Terry mentioned, a Discretionary Trust with Corporate Trustee is one of the best structures for not only asset protection, but also for tax minimization and estate planning

There are 2 ways to do it:

1. Have a company act as trustee for a discretionary trust.

2. Have a company own the property outright and a discretionary trust own the shares.

This will involve the trustee as the legal owner, but the beneficial owner of the property will be the beneficiaries of the trust. With a discretionary trust no one beneficiary has any fixed entitlement to the assets of the trust. So the property of the trust is onwed by no one individual but by the group as a whole. This group could be 1000+ potential people. Since there is no fixed entitlement a trustee in bankruptcy cannot take over the trust – they would become just one of the potential beneficiaries and a trustee would not get hold of the assets if a beneficiary were to go bankrupt.

A director of the trustee company controls the trust and its assets. This is a role, like employee, but not property. The appointors of the trust controls who the trustee is, so this is the role that controls the trustee. The position of appointor is not property either and cannot be taken control of if the the appointor were to go bankrupt. ie the trustee in bankruptcy couldn't step into the role of appointor.

1. Is preferrable as the 50% CGT discount will be avalable on the sale of the proeprty.