Forum Replies Created

Viewing 20 posts - 5,421 through 5,440 (of 16,328 total)
  • Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    They can refuse to leave indefinitely. It would then be up to the owner of the property to take them to court.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    I wouldn't take early settlement for this reason. It is better to have the vendor keep this potential problem just in case. Some people are having problems finding accomodation for various reasons and some tenants just refuse to leave.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Colin

    How does the change in financial arrangement supported by a lien on the property thing work?

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    It may reduce the tax – you would have to do the figures. It would also help you manage the CGT as there are other ways to reduce your overall taxable income such as prepaying interest, contributing to super etc

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    you can choose s 118-145(1) ITAA 97

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    I think the contract would be still binding in NSW on the seller. I would have to look at the terms again and haven't got one handy..

    Good Tyson – better late than never!

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213
    ferdinandch wrote:
    Guys, I want to ask a question, the scheduled settlement date is 11/08 and I really want to settle early, say it 04/08, even though there is still tenant living there, I don't really care, I don't mind to pay interest from 04/08 to 11//08. Is it possible to do that? The sale contract said it will be vacant at the settlement date, so I assume from 11/08, if the tenant is still there, I guess it will be the vendor's problem, is it correct ? I don't know what is my legal right regarding this. Cheers Ferdinand

    Ask your solicitor.

    You can settle early if the other side agrees. The tenant will be your problem then – what if he won't leave?

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    I think you will have to do the sums. It may cost you XX now, but it will save you ZZ per year in tax sort of thing. You then have to decide is it worth doing.

    You could possibly lease the property to a trust and then allow the trust to on lease it at higher rates. But you would have to do everything at arms length for tax reasons.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    You will have to read your own contract to see what the terms are. This term could have been changed. (unlikely)

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    What state?

    If NSW, then under the standard contract the seller can terminate it if the deposit is not paid (cl 2.5). But the contract would still be binding.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213
    paulandjo wrote:
    Hi all. I am a full time housewife who managed to buy a + cash flow property entirely in my name using the equity in my PPOR and my husband as Guarantor. That was in 2009. I would like to sell the property next year as it has increased in value by roughly 200k and i have losses of roughly 30k from other properties my husband and i purchased together. Problem is, i'm either gonna have to fork out big time on realestate agent fees, then CGT, or the other thought i had was to set up a family trust and sell it to the trust at the current market value, as the rent alone will still cover the morgage, we would still own a property that could continue to make us good money in the future, and the stamp duty would be similar, maybe more than real estate agent fees. I would still have to pay CGT though and either way i think id lose about 50K through the process. Someone suggested selling half to my husband??? Has anyone got any ideas on how to maximize the profit and minimize the loss?
    Cheers.

    Another idea.

    If you want to sell to release the equity and restructure etc then you could think about selling half the property to a discretionary trust in one financial year and half in the next. This would be a bit of mucking around and may result in 2 lots of conveyancing fees, but could save you CGT.
     

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Colin

    An adult can acutally earn up to $16,000 pa tax free when the low income tax rebate is taken into account. This will raise to about $20k next year (or the year after?). This makes using a discretionary trust very attractive now.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Thanks Paul.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Hmm

    There is not CGT on the family home. Even if you inherit it you will not have to pay CGT unless you rent it out and later sell it. Stamp duty exemptions would apply to the transfer post death too.

    If you buy the house now you will pay stamp duty.

    Anyway,
    1. Yes
    2. You would still have a debt to the estate. But the parent could forgive the loan in their will
    3. wait?

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213
    paulandjo wrote:
    Terryw wrote:
    Not many ways to avoid CGT.

    At least you are on a low income, so the effect will be less. If you have a $200,000 gain then take off buying and selling costs, say $40,000 and then apply the 50% CGT discount = a taxable gain of $80,000 this would be added to your other income.

    Selling to a trust won't assit with this, CGT will still apply at market rates, stamp duty as well.

    Any loss by the trust will be trapped in the trust, land tax may also be payable depending on the state you are in.

    It may still be a good idea though as it will release equtiy which you can use to pay down non deductible debt. But get advice first to make sure it passes ATO scrutiny.

    Thanks for your time and reply.
    When you say any loss by the trust will be trapped in the trust, is that good or bad? I'm assuming that it would be bad for my hubby as it then can not reduce his taxable income? But would it be good or bad for me having zero income?

    Well, your husband couldn't use a loss to offset his personal income if the loss is in the trust. But it would carry forward to offset future incomes.

    Having zero income could be good and bad! Good in that you pay now tax, but bad it that you have wasted the tax free threshold – you could have earnt up to $16,000 pa and pay no tax.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213
    khristie wrote:
    Thanks Terry,

    I have received some advise that if we were remove all deposits and withdrawals from this home loan and leave as just the interest only payments and deductions that we will be back on track for 2011-2012 tax return.

    I don't know about that.

    You have a mxied purpose loan now, but the ATO may allow an exception where money is recouped and repaid and it could be possible:

    see paragraph 17 of TR 2000/2 Income tax: deductibility of interest on moneys drawn down under line of credit facilities and redraw facilities
    http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?docid=TXR/TR20002/NAT/ATO/00001

    If your accountant is giving the go ahead then make sure you get it in writing.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Ideally you should keep business and pleasure separate. But it could be done with a mixed loan and the interes worked out, but this will create possible problems later when trying to pay off the private debt first.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Sounds very complex. Her not being able to qualify for the loans makes it even harder. What about if she just sells "her" property and takes the proceeds. That would save you from having to guarantee the loan (but I guess she is probably living in this one).

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213
    khristie wrote:
    Thanks for the reply Darren.

    Some additional information that I should have noted is that we have a second rental property which is also managed by the same property manager. At the end of everymonth the income after expenses she has paid is also put into this account. I then each month pay from that loan the interest only as well as transfer the payment to the other account for the second rental property. Any moneies that are left over are used to pay electricity, gas, rates x 2, water x 2, telephone etc etc.

    We are currently getting the house valued (last value was at $600k) to see if we can get a better interest rate.
    If we are able to refinace for the same amount and have it drawn up as tennants in common ( as a don't work, 5 kids) would we be able to claim it 2011-2012  just in my hubbys tax return.

    I will also organise another account where the income and bill payments can be used and then just transfer the repayments each month. so the rental property accounts will only show the interest only payments.
    Does this sound right??

    I replied before reading the whole thread.

    It seems even more complicated now as you appear to be borrowing from the LOC to pay the interest on the other investment property.  I fear you are going to have some high accounting bills to work out the interest – that is probably why your accountant said none was deductible (which is probably incorrect).

    You also cannot simply change from Joint Tenants to Tenants in Common by refinancing, you would have to do this with a transfer at the same time as the refinance. Stamp duty would probably be payable, unless your property is in VIC (maybe)

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

    Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Not many ways to avoid CGT.

    At least you are on a low income, so the effect will be less. If you have a $200,000 gain then take off buying and selling costs, say $40,000 and then apply the 50% CGT discount = a taxable gain of $80,000 this would be added to your other income.

    Selling to a trust won't assit with this, CGT will still apply at market rates, stamp duty as well.

    Any loss by the trust will be trapped in the trust, land tax may also be payable depending on the state you are in.

    It may still be a good idea though as it will release equtiy which you can use to pay down non deductible debt. But get advice first to make sure it passes ATO scrutiny.

    Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
    http://www.Structuring.com.au
    Email Me

    Lawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au

Viewing 20 posts - 5,421 through 5,440 (of 16,328 total)