I mean, set up  the appropriate loans, and not make any payments.

Living on equity means borrowing or living on borrowings. Borrowings will obviously increase. Any increased interest won't be deductible either.What if you lived on rents instead and capitalised loans? interest would probably be deductible if set up correctly

There is a huge difference!

Thats the way. Make sure it is interest only too.. If you have an offset on the PPOR even better as your rents and wages can sit in this and help save you even more.

I imagine any selling costs (and other capital costs) would have to be apportioned between time lived in v time rented. Don't know for sure though?Rob?

Best to pay off non deductible debt first as this will save you tax.

booge wrote:
The IP is purely in my name from before i met my wife. Haven't refinanced yet, meeting with Mortgage broker next

I am concerned by this comment. What do you mean – are you talking about adding the wife to title? Mortgage brokers cannot give tax or legal advice and I would be concerned about deductibility of loans if you do…[Read more]

Banks are in the business of lending. As long as you qualify why wouldn't they lend?You will be using equity, but it won't be used as security for the new property. The PPOR will be used as security.

You would be liable for all expenses up to the end of your lease or until they find a new person to replace you.But, the agent also has a duty to minimise costs – they shouldn't leave the property empty just to extract money out of you.

Don't use the offset straight off for the deposit as the interest on your PPOR will increase and this won't be claimable.Setting it up like your broker suggests will save you tax and keep the properties from being cross collateralised.

Morts, not sure where the fraud and negligence came into it.With a negligence case you would, if lost, have a judgment awarded against you. This is what we are protecting against – bankruptcy. If you don't pay a judgment debt there are a few things that can happen and all of them involve the seizure of your property. If you don't have enough…[Read more]

It could be claimed that your wife owns your share of the house, ie 50%, as trustee for you. A court could deem, or construe, that a trust is in place even though you may not have a formal arrangement or agreement in place. This would be a constructive trust. Probably won't happen unless you are looking at big claims and there is big equity. There…[Read more]

It would also show up of the credit report of the individual who is guaranteeing the loan.

morts wrote:
Our PPoR is in my wife's name (beacuse I run a buisness)

This is a good idea, but it doesn't necessarily mean your property is safe if you are sued. Have you contributed to the repayment of the loan on this property or made other non financial contributions?Does you wife have a valid will set up with a testamentary discretionary…[Read more]

Your broker is right.You accountant is wrong. Or, I should say you cannot redraw the money and use it for the new property because the new property will be a personal expense.

There is a difference between boarders and renters – boarders just pay their share of costs, not for the room. Renters pay for the room.In this I think the intent is to claim expenses so they would need to be renters.I think you should seriously consider not doing this, ie claiming it, as the small tax savings now could be large tax losses later…[Read more]

You could check the Duties Act (VIC) 

I agree with Richard – it will have no effect.

In Australia your income from a SMSF would be tax exempt once you have reached retirement age. But the laws of USA are different and your entity over there would be, probably, taxed.

Asset protection = company because of the limited liability.If the trustee is sued the trust assets will be at risk, if these are not enough to satisfy any judgment then the personal assets of the trustee will be at risk.