[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 22, 2005 - 12:23 pm

Gday

a few kiwis I’ve been talking to keep raving on about kiwi fish and chups. whats so special about them ??

Anyone recommend any places to go try when I am over there soon ?

Andrew.[cap]

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 20, 2005 - 3:17 pm

Hi there,

thanks for all the replies – these replies have been extremely helpful.

Basically I was just trying to guage what sort of standing the actual offers that I make are. I have got the buyer beware templates and I guess I just assumed that because it is written it is more ‘binding’ in a sense.

I will be sure to add those recommendations as conditions.

thanks again for all your help! [cap]

Cheers,
Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 19, 2005 - 4:02 am

Hi there,

thanks for the reply.

What I am trying to avoid is throwing money into inspections without having secured the property.

From what your saying, it seems that an offer is not much really. Even if I put all these subject to clauses in…

I suppose the only way would be to put the clauses into the actual contract itself…

Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 19, 2005 - 2:58 am

Hi Shaz,

Sorry – I am buying in NSW.

Cheers,
Andrew.[cap]

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 19, 2005 - 2:30 am

Hi Steve,

I suppose the first thing is to congratulate you on your savings. Well done on being so diligent.

The next thing is that $800k in cash sitting idle is never good.

How old are you ? When are you looking to retire? How is your super? Do you have any other assets, have you ever bought property ?

If you have never bought property, maybe the best thing to do is to start small and gradually expand your circle of competence.

Also, think about joint venture arrangements and being the “money” partner. This may also be a good way of leveraging someone else’s experience.

Cheers,
Andrew.[cap]

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 17, 2005 - 7:53 am

Hi Crj,

thanks for your comments. I guess I am just a little wary about having too many ‘subject tos’ At this stage it would be subject to finance, pest & building inspections, and council building certificates.

I suppose I just dont want too many subject to’s that may make my offer less attractive and reduce my negotiating position.

Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 13, 2005 - 2:40 pm

Hi there,

thanks for the replies. I’ve checked the KPI magazine site and it seems that you can only order back issues or sign up for a full subscription. I guess they dont do one offs since that would stop ppl from subscribing I guess…

Shar – I guess if they have it all the way in baulkham hills they should have it in some of the bigger newsagents in the city….now to find a really big newsagent in the city…

Will let you know how I go

cheers,
andrew[cap]

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 9, 2005 - 10:17 am

Hi All

I just stumbled upon a great website run by the federal government.

It basically contains a log of all disasters for a region – and it is searchable.

Maybe good to see if the area you are buying in is flood/bushfire/storm prone etc etc.

http://www.ema.gov.au/ema/emadisasters.nsf/webpages/HomePage?OpenDocument

Cheers,
Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 8, 2005 - 12:15 pm

Hi Westan,

So fixed rates being below variable is rare in NZ?

I would have thought with the US’s deficit the size that it is, and the fact that it has increased rates 6 (or is that 7 now?) times in a row, and with the RBA being so “hawkish” as the media put it that there would be upward pressure on rates.

If thats the case you would expect more people to be fixing mortgages, and therefore increasing the price of the fixed mortgages above the price of variable mortgages?

This may be getting slightly off topic – apologies! Any economists in the forum?

Andrew.[cap]

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 8, 2005 - 12:10 pm

Hi Surfer,

Pardon my ignorance, I have heard of LAQC a few times on the forums – what does it actually stand for ?

Cheers,
Andrew.[cap]

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 8, 2005 - 12:08 pm

Hi Playa,

Thanks for the reply & the example.

I was wondering whether there was a similar concept to evaluate deals by.

This isn’t a direct parallel, but for example with say Listed Investment Companies/Property trusts they trade at a premium/discount depending on where the cycle is at the moment (however they generally trade at a discount…)

Anyway having said that there is probably no relationship between the ratable/land value and the independent valuations…

Or maybe the difference simply reflects the current value of the actual structure/house on the land…but I’m just speculating now [cap]

Cheers,
Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 7, 2005 - 2:32 pm

GP,

Sorry I forgot to mention that generally, any Australian accountant worth his salt would ensure that everything is distributed.

From what I know so far, everything is normally distributed to a ‘bucket company’ which can then be taxed at the corporate rate, so that 99A doesn’t apply.

In that case, technically its been distributed out of the trust & taxed. So effectively its the same as NZ I guess…

The point I wanted to make is that net income has to be distributed out each year. I dont think there is anything stopping you from putting the taxed amounts back into the trust…

I thought you were inferring that you could keep funds in a trust and not have them taxed at all…

Its all good

Cheers,
Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 7, 2005 - 1:57 pm

Terry

Interesting idea. I’m not sure if I understand how this works. If you make a distribtion from one trust to the other, then certainly that is income to the beneficiary trust ?

So basically what your saying is you just shift the funds from one trust to the other back and forth each year ?

I dunno why Part IVA wouldn’t catch this…its kind of written as a generic ‘catch all’ type thing.

Now this is getting interesting…[cap]

cheers,
andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 7, 2005 - 11:48 am

GreatPig

Just to add in a few things…

Again, just taking a stab in the dark here, but I would assume that Aussie trust laws are similar to NZ trust laws. Apparently trust laws all originated from English estate laws.

So I would assume that they both have a similar structure – someone correct me if I am wrong. In Australia, if net income is left in a trust and hasn’t been distributed out (no one is “presently entitled” to it) then it can be taxed at the highest marginal rates under Section 99A.

Does anyone know if there is a 99A equivalent in NZ?

Yeah…this is where a NZ accountant’s advice would be handy.

Cheers,
Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 4, 2005 - 6:35 am

Little bastards…

thanks Shaz!

Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 4, 2005 - 6:29 am

Mark,

Thanks for the encouragement!

Like others have said in the forums..the trust structure is more about asset protection than avoiding capital gains.

Even if you managed to dodge CGT via a weird/wacky/”creative” arrangement, the commissioner always has Part IVA up his sleeve.

For anyone who doesn’t know, Part IVA is the anti avoidance legislation of the tax act. If the commissioner deems that the primary/dominant purpose of your “scheme” is to obtain a tax benefit he can still get you…and scale back your benefits…

Cheers,
Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 4, 2005 - 6:24 am

Shar,

Seeing as I am studying for an tax exam, I’ve looked up my text. Here is a bit of a quote from the legislation/guide I have in front of me:

“A trust estate is a “resident trust estate” if:
(a) a trustee was a resident at any time during the year of income; or

(b) the central management and control of the trust estate was located in Australia at any time during the year of income: sec 95(2) ITAA36

So even if you did argue that central management and control of the trust came under the NZ solicitor, you would still come under (a) I think…

Mark? are you around ?

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 4, 2005 - 6:15 am

Hi Shar,

Firstly, I am by no means a fully qualified accountant, all I have is a few weeks of intensive study in Australian Tax Law.

My understanding of trusts in general for asset protection is that you have a corporate trustee. I’m not sure what happens when you have individuals as both trustees & beneficiaries…things may start to get messy there…I would think that if you are the trustee and that you are an Australian resident then the trust would also be a resident of Australia.

This is irrespective of the fact that the solicitor in NZ has control over the trust. The commissioner generally looks at the substance of the situation. Ultimately, the control rests with you.

Thats just my 2c worth…if I happen to be wrong, someone please correct me.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 4, 2005 - 5:57 am

Hi Guys,

I’ve heard the term ‘borer treatment’ a few times in conversations.

I’m pretty sure someone mentioned that there were no termites in NZ either.

So is this just a regular pest/insect/cockroach treament ?

Cheers,
Andrew.

[aptamParticipant@aptamJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 61]

February 4, 2005 - 2:38 am

Hi Matthew,

I guess because I am yet to make my first purchase, I’d like to actually see the place I was buying for myself.

It sounds as if physically being there really isn’t necessary. I guess you just need to build up contacts with R/E agents/property managers/building inspectors… to make up for it instead.

thanks for your comments Matthew.

Joe – just out of interest, how long have you been looking in NZ before this offer went through ?

cheers,
Andrew.