make sure the wording of the consent order exludes this.

However, It could still be possible if you make promises or she is able to get a new interest in the property – by helping you pay hte mortgage, renovate etc.

There is an example in the law see
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/s118.145.html

Example: You live in a house for 3 years. You are posted overseas for 5 years and you rent it out during your absence. On your return you move back into it for 2 years. You are then posted overseas again for 4 years (again renting it out), at the end of which you sell the house.

You have not treated any other dwelling as your main residence during your absences.

You may choose to continue to treat the house as your main residence during both absences because each absence is less than 6 years.

You can make this choice when preparing your income tax return for the income year in which you sold the house.

Not sure what Adam is saying here, but you only get one main residence exemption at any one time, but you could have a potential exemption between 2 or more properties if both had been the main residence. The election to claim one as the main residence is only made in the tax return of the year of sale.

jasedc5r’s property would probably be totally exempt from CGT if it was the main residence from the date of settlement and he has been absent for less than 6 years and it is less than 2 hectares in size and it was not used to produce income while living there. Having 1 or more other properties won’t effect this.

Prob not a good idea to sell a main residence only buy further property. You would lose the only CGT exempt asset and would have to pay rent on the new home with after tax dollars.

The rules of law in countries such as Indonesia doesn’t operate like Australia. I went to Jakarta a few years ago to help someone who had their property stolen. Similar in Thailand, I know a peron who had their property stolen – forged papers. He has been going through the courts for 12 years to get it back.

Yes it could be done. many legal issues to consider though.

See RPI from this forum, he is a property lawyer based in Brisbane.

Firstly a banker should not be giving tax advice.

But he is correct in this instance (pretty rare for a banker!)

The purpose and use of the borrowed funds determine deductibility. Security for the loan doesn’t matter.
In this case you are borrowing to pay down a private loan. Interest is not deductible in this instance.

It is still possible to get good asset protection while owning a property in individual names.

Since land tax is imposed by state legilsation the rules vary from state to state. So first you should decide which state you will be looking to buy in and then decide the structure.

This is only the case where the loan is in a different name to the owner of the property.

There are a wide varieties of hybrid trusts and lending will depend on the structure and terms of the deed

Get some legal advice on this.