[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 22, 2007 - 9:45 am

Adrian is on the ball, I use him myself
Superior Tax Solutions
Mt Elisa, Melbourne
The phone number in the above post is out dated.
(03) 97878906
He has been very busy and I'm not sure if he's taking on more clients.
Worth a phone call tho.
Oh, and I'm in Brisbane too.

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 12, 2007 - 4:10 am

raddles wrote:

The main problems with resettlements arise when the trust deed is changed is such a way that beneficiaries are changed or entitlements of those beneficiaries are changed – that normally will trigger the problems with the office of state revenue

Hi Raddles

This would depend on the deed. Some are able to change beneficiaries with a minute entry. In which case the resettlement would be unnecessary and no OSR problems.

I have a tax barrister that I often refer to as a source of info.  He calls me when he comes across a problem with the wording for my own enlightenment
As you would know, it's all in the way someone reads (or interprets) the wording of the deed. Some are clear,  flexable and easy to use while others are not.

It also depends on the ability of the accountant you are using. If the accountant understands the deed it can be used to its potential for a reasonable price.

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 11, 2007 - 9:34 am

This depends on the wording of the trust deed and what it allows for. Some will allow  for the changing of a trustee while others do not.  I do not see why some deeds have it any other way, but there are some that will trigger stamp duty and possibly CGT if need to be resettled. Others that will need a minute entry only. This is my prefered option.

Best to ask these questions of the solicitor setting up the deed for you and ensuring the accountant knows how to do it also.  If not,  maybe time to get a new accountant….

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 5, 2007 - 9:10 pm

The only stupid question is the one NOT asked.
Never be afraid to ask, the worst you can get is a NO.

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 5, 2007 - 9:05 pm

I don't believe the formemtioned trust to be any more flexable than a number of other structures, especially since the laws changed. The book being sold has outdated views and to my knowledge has not been updated.
Just my opinion.
I'm not a fan of this trust for a number of reasons, others disagree so do your own due dilligence on everything.

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 5, 2007 - 5:42 am

Qlds007 wrote:

A badly worded Trust Deed will have you in deep water.

Exactly Richard. It's something that is easily overlooked unless you understand what you are reading.

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 4, 2007 - 5:25 am

That could potentially have tax issues after a seperation eg. who pays if the you have the title in the lower income earner's name. Is the high income earner liable for the tax if the title isn't in their name? I would think not. So the low income earner gets slugged with all or most of the tax billwhile still having to split the profit.

It also could trigger child support issues as the low income earner now is not on such a low income, but still has to spilt the profit from the sale. And family payment issues as the forcasted income is now more and a potential bill comming to repay the funds.

It looks all good for the high income earner but not so rosy for the low income earner.

Not to worry, I'll sort it out.
It creates some interesting times…

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

April 1, 2007 - 5:48 am

Thanks Terry but the Assets are not being transfered between spouces, but sold

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

March 30, 2007 - 5:42 am

No Richard
I put those there on purpose……apparently
Hope all is well with you mate.

Back on topic though, I believe the best way for distributing funds is through a trust IMOP

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

March 30, 2007 - 5:37 am

Thats what I found out today. It needs to be a family court order.
Oh well……

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

March 29, 2007 - 4:46 am

Gee Richard
Do you really need to put your details twice?
More chance of people reading it I suppose……

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

March 29, 2007 - 4:43 am

If the trust deed has the provision, it should be able to be resettled. After which the 80 yrs starts again.
But the laws in regards to this will no doubt change before then, so I would check again closed to the date.

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

March 14, 2007 - 6:03 am

I went to see thema few years ago now, and was told that 1 IP per year can not be done.

I proved them WAY wrong.

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

March 12, 2007 - 9:37 am

Exactly Simon, but I would take it one step further.

Wealth gives you choice, but being rich is a state of mind.

Being involved in a rather messy divorce with kids involved I can say that I now feel richer than I have in years. It is my choice what and where I put my money and it will always benefit myself and my 2 girls.

My point is that even in the darkest times, we can be rich.

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

February 27, 2007 - 10:40 pm

Spot on Terry

Registered mortgages get paid first in the case of bankruptcy.

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

January 2, 2007 - 11:17 pm

Terry is on the money. There are so many differently worded deeds out there. You will ned to read and understand the deed you have before that question can be answered.

I have read some that allow the appointer to resign and be replaced.

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

November 10, 2006 - 8:00 am

My understanding was that the IP is already purchased or at least contract signed.

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

November 8, 2006 - 6:25 am

Hi Andrew

Terry is on the money IMOP.
Structuring should be done prior to purchasing. This makes things easier. It may be better to keep this IP as is and structurefor your nextone.

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

November 8, 2006 - 6:18 am

Hiya Richard

What posts?
I haven’t looked at this site in about 4 weeks. I was supprised how many posts there are. [lmao]

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]

[cataParticipant@cataJoin Date: 2005Post Count: 559]

November 7, 2006 - 6:53 am

It really depends on how the trust deed is worded. You will need to ask this question to the people who are setting up the trust for you. They will be able to give you the best answer for the trust you are purchasing.

CATA
Asset Protection Specialist
[email protected]