Forum Replies Created

Viewing 20 posts - 6,321 through 6,340 (of 16,328 total)
  • Profile photo of TerrywTerryw
    Participant
    @terryw
    Join Date: 2001
    Post Count: 16,213

    Paul

    That may be the case concerning an assignment. An instalment contract is really a normal contract with the settlement period extended from the standard 42 days to about 30 years, with some other conditions such as the right to occupy before completion.

    But there would probably be other provisions in the mortgage conditions which may prevent an instalment contract as it affects the lender's security for the loan. If there is nothing which prevents one, then it is open season. if there are conditions and you do instalment contracts then you may run the risk of having the loan called in for breaching the conditions.

    (I heard a rumour that this happened to a big wrapper years ago)

    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
    wwc_1980 wrote:
    JacM wrote:
    Also I'm unclear on whether the equity cannot be accessed while there remains a debt on the property, or whether the equity cannot be accessed at all.

    jac

    You can certainly access the equity in a property where there is an existing debt, so long as there is sufficient equity to meet your needs and it falls with in the maximum LVR your financier is prepared to lend.
    I purchased my first property, did some renovations, had the property revalued, over $70K in equity and borrowed $52K of this to ensure it fell below the bank's max 95% LVR.

    I think Jac was talking about property owned in a SMSF.

    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

    One of the requirements for a contract involving land is that it be in written form. And for a contract for land to be valid it needs to identify the land in question somehow, such as an address or a title reference or a name (eg. of a farm) 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

    By withdrawing the $10k now you are borrowing it. So interest on this would not be deductible if you put it in your pocket.

    But since it is a small amount the interest wouldn't amount to much.

    I think it is a good idea to ditch the LOC and go IO with offset. Later when you get some more equity you can set up a LOC again and then use that to invest.

    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

    Generally banks will only lend to someone who is not on title if:
    a) they are a spouse (married or DF); or
    b) they are getting some benefit out of it, such as the controller of a unit trust (this is rare now).

    But they would require guarantees from the title holders as well so this wouldn't help serviceability much.

    What you could do with this is to get your mum to buy as trustee for yourself or you and yourwife. This would be a bare trust where you and your wife are the ultimate beneficiaires and mum is the trustee. It needs to be properly documented up front and then you could avoid stamp duty later on (in most states) when your mum transfers title to you. Along the way you would be paying tax and claiming as if you were title holders.

    The only problem is the loan. Most banks these days want to know if someone is acting as trustee for someone else. If they find out they may not lend, or they may insist on assessing the serviceability of the ultimate beneficial owners

    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

    They will probably increase broker clawbacks again 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
    PaulDobson wrote:
    Hi Max

    Mike is correct, however you should also recognise that most mortgage documentation also;
    1.  Requires you to get lender approval to rent the property
    2,  Requires you to get lender approval to sell the property
    3.  Requires you to get lender approval to make any changes to the property

    That is, there is quite a large list of what you can't do.  As to whether everybody adhere's to the exact wording of their mortgage documents, I'll leave that up to you.  Of course the lenders do use all these different clauses quite expertly when they need to, i.e. when you don't pay  ;-)

    Cheers,  Paul

    Not really Paul

    Most say that you need permission from the bank to rent the property, but that if the rental is a standard residential lease then no permission is required. You obviously need the lenders permission to sell as they hold the property as security and title couldn't be transferred without their permission and with minor changes to the property permission wouldn't be required.
     

    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 won't have a lease at all if you do that.

    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

    Don't forget you cannot access the equity in a smsf owned property.

    For trusts there are basically 2 types units and discretionary. Trust Magic is a nice general intro, but it doesn't go into the topic in any depth. For that you will need the trust structure guide which costs a few hundred.

    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

    Main residences are exempt from CGT (generally). If your husband didn't have any other main residence at the same time he may not have been liable.

    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 don't know about that. That could still possibly trigger stamp duty on the assets of the trust and possibly CGT if it is considered a resettlement. You would need an expert trust lawyer to advise.

    Why not just leave the funds there and have the o/s trust loan funds to the australian trust? That would probably be safer from an asset protection POV and possibly tax – though being a tax haven would mean you have to be careful.

    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

    And remember, if the valuation doesn’t come in at what you want, try another! Spending $300 could save you thousands.

    I had one come in $50,000 more recently.

    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

    yes, I think it would be a capital expenses and so you could only claim depreciation.

    The interest on any loan used for an investment may be deductible – but be careful not to have other non deductible expenses on the card or it will get messy.

    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

    yeah, I think Westpac stopped doing 85% no LMI

    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

     a deposit is not claimable at all. It is a capital expense.

    you may be able to claim interest on the deposit money, depending on your circumstances.

    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
    Jamie M wrote:
    Qlds007 wrote:
    My god whats your name John Daly……

    Cheers

    Yours in Finance

    Just call me Tiger…. without the 8 mistresses :)

    yeah, 7 is more than enough.

    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 never take fixed loans because of the loss of ability to move easily.

    But it is not the end of the world. You can still access equity with the same bank, set up a LOC for example later on.

    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 could class it as your main residence and have it CGT free – but this would expose the new one to CGT. Which has had more?

    see ID 2003/1113
    http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?docid=AID/AID20031113/00001

    ID 2003/1112
    http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?locid=%27AID/AID20031112%27&PiT=99991231235958

    s 118-192 ITAA 1997
    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/s118.192.html

    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

    The Bank of Japan is, I believe, the japanese version of the reserve bank. They don't actually lend individuals money. So although the official rate may be 0%, or maybe 0.25 – 0.5% the rate for borrowers of housing loans is around 2-3% I think. there are some vendor finance type deals with low or no interest for the first few years though.

    Secondly, it would be almost impossible for a non resident to borrow in Japan for Japanese property, let alone foreign property. It you were working in Japan and earning Yen you could borrow from an Australian bank based there, with low rates, say 2 to 3%, but the LVR would be 70% or less and the loan would be called in if you ever moved away from Japan and/or stopped earning income in Yen.

    japanese lending policies are extremely strict because of the bursting of the bubble many years ago. So it is not easy to get a loan there.

    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
    propertyjockey wrote:
    OK now I am confused.

    My vocation is subject to litigation. Because of this my accountant has advised, any property I buy should be purchased under the umbrella of a family discretionary trust. The owner of the property is the name of the trust.

    At present, I am the trustee of this trust with my family as beneficeries. That is to say the entity known as PJ.

    I only became aware of using a further 'arms length' method of ensuring the trustee is a pty ltd company. The sole share holder being myself. This still gives me administrative control as trustee but with an added layer of protection. 

    If it is the company(trustee) that owns the property and not the trust, how does the trust hand out income to its beneficeries if it owns nothing?

    I was under the impression the role of the trustee (company or not) is simply administrative.

    PJ

    Please excuse the ignorance. Everyone has to start somewhere.

    It takes a while for this info to sink in.

    Broadly speaking there are two ways to own property – for yourself and on behalf of someone else.

    The best example is children's bank accounts. If a mum opens an account for the 2 yr old child she is owning the property (ie the money). Whose money is it? It is in the mums name but the kid is the true owner. This would be an example of a bare trust.

    So the trustee is the legal owner, but the trustee only owns the property for the beneficiaries of the trust – these are the beneficial owners of the property. This is why if a trustee is sued the property of the trust is, generally, out of reach.

    The role of the trustee is more than administrative – they are the legal owners and can do with the property as per their agreement with the beneficiaries.

    There are also 2 aspects of asset protection.

    The first is if a trustee is sued as an individual. eg you are trustee of your property trust and are sued because of defamation related to your personal issues. The property that you own as trustee for others is not able to be taken from you to fulfill any judgment – generally, there are many exceptions.

    The second is if the trust itself is sued. the trust is not a legal entity, so it is the trustee that is sued. In this case the trustee may be liable for the judgment but is generally indemnified from the trust assets. But, if the trust does not have enough assets to satisfy the judgment then the trustee's other assets will be at risk. This is why you should use a company for anything in which there is a risk of being sued – such as owning real property or a business. If you just own shares there is no real risk of the trust being sued as shareholders are not liable for anything the company does.

    Using a company as trustee also has other advantages such as:
    – helps to clearly distinguish personal assets from trust assets.
    – easy to change control of the trust. You just change directors. If you are a personal trustee you would have to change title deeds and loans etc
    – easy to add people
    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

Viewing 20 posts - 6,321 through 6,340 (of 16,328 total)