Why not do some figures? On a $650,000 property the tax savings would be substantial I think.

1. possibly no CGT
2. If there is a profit then tax would be payable.
3. same as 2

It is not easy determining CGT/Income tax on a main residence sub-division. Go to bantacs.com.au and look at their PDF booklets for some ideas.

more like 4 years
https://www.propertyinvesting.com/forums/getting-technical/legal-accounting/4322697

But the links in my post are dead now

No need for a warrant for these sorts of enquiries. Police and other agencies, even private investigators, could get access to these records if they relate to the investigation of a possible offence.

I did one loan years ago to a unit trust. The daughter had bad credit, so set up a unit trust with mum as trustee, daughter sole unit holder. It got through without them checking.

But I think generally they would require personal guarantees from the unit holders as well as the directors of the trustee.

So, who are the unit holders? ie who is the trustee of the superfund? If it is a company, then you could possibly get away with the lender knot knowing there is a superfund involved. The smae for a person as trustee too maybe. But, they could ask for tax returns etc of the unit holder.

Also I havne't looked into this, but there may be a requirement under the new AML legislation to declare any trusts involved.

Who is the borrower?

If it is the trustee with the aim to redeem the units then maybe. But if it is any other way then I think not as the unit holders would generally be required to give personal guarantes.

I would agree with Colin.

Both are private expenses so you cannot claim any interest which means you should generally pay the highest interest loan first.

Change the scenario a bit. you have 2 credit cards, one high interest, one low – which would you pay first?

If the car loan was deductible, then you would generally pay down the house first as you could save more tax this way, but it would depend on your income as well – if you earn low income and don't pay tax then you would not be saving any!

Yes, financially you would be better off by renting out your unit and renting the one next door. But this would be dependant on the loan amount etc

This is because if your property is negative geared then you can claim any loss against your income and will save tax.

BTW, it is still possible to rent out your home and have it CGT exempt too.

Ray

If you are building yourself the lenders would probably consider you an owner builder, even if you are licenced.

I would imagine the mortgage insurers probably would not accept this arrangement and you would need to contribute 20% at least. that is 20% of the land costs and 20% of the costs of construction. You would have to pay your 20% upfront before the bank would chip in too.

If you were building for someone else then you could probably get away with 10%

Advantage = separate legal entity Limited liability.

Disadvantages = no 50% CGT discount, possibly more land tax, high and more complex accounting, Corporations Act laws and ASIC oversight.

Why not look at using a discretionary trust (which also have disadantages, but some sig advantages as well)