All Topics / Help Needed! / Company or Partnership!

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Profile photo of siddantsiddant
    Participant
    @siddant
    Join Date: 2007
    Post Count: 2

    Hello All,

    Me and 8 other friends have joined hands and decided that we shld do investment into property. 
    First roadblock now is 
    a) do we write a partnership
    b) do we have a company 
    we do want to have this go for 12-15 years . we all do believe it will.
    people who think partnership is good within the 8 people are sayin this
    1) easy to setup
    2) easy to manage
    3) the bank will ask everyone of us to be a guarantor when we buy a property. so going for a company to mitigate the risk of being a guarantor thereby standing to loose all you have got outside of hte business is nullified
    people who think company is good are sayin that
    1) more secure
    2) when someone leaves, we dont have to dissolve and restart the partnership on a property 
    3) not sure if we can mitigate the guarantor problem after we pay off our first house. so we cant really say that being a company will safegaurd me or the other partners with the full loan to be paid in case the other 8 default.
    I shall stop here. let you guys take it away…
    what do you think ?
    Partnership?
    or 
    Company and why?
    if i do miss somkey points go ahead and post em so i can learn;)
    to add to all of this ; what is a good 10 year projection software ; if u hav used one. like say if i chose to buy 350,000 dollar houses over the 10 years ( one every year), it has to show where i will stand after 10 years?
    cheers
    and thanks in advance
    sidd–
    Profile photo of Tysonboss1Tysonboss1
    Participant
    @tysonboss1
    Join Date: 2007
    Post Count: 306

    For this I would recommend you look into a "Unit Trust", the property would be owned by the unit trust and each of you would hold a certain number of shares, that way your risk is limited to the amount that you invest, and when some one wishes to leave the trust their shares can be purchased by other members, if someone new wishes to join you can issue more shares.

    With a company you won't get the 50% capital gain tax discount, and with a partnership even if you only own 1% of the partnership if every thing goes bad you can end up responsible for 100% of the debt, because there is no limit to your liability

    Profile photo of syedh18022syedh18022
    Participant
    @syedh18022
    Join Date: 2003
    Post Count: 7

    I suggest find your self a good Lawyer, and an Accountant,  Talk to them before making any decesion, with 8 different oppnions, it is good to spend the money and talk to the professional as how best to structure it, entry, exit and other conditions, must be agreed amoung all participants before you go looking for properties. Ask all the questions such as the above they will best be able to answer your questions on the spot.
    Partnership is too risky. Good Luck

    Profile photo of NucopiaNucopia
    Member
    @nucopia
    Join Date: 2007
    Post Count: 102

     I agree with Tysonboss1
    look at a " Unit Trust "  as a siutable set up.  

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

    Its going to be very messy with 8 people. How are you going to agree on things? (maybe good to have an odd number?).

    I would probably look at using a unit trust too. But who will be the trustee? Having 8 trustees could complicate things – you will need 8 people to sign eveything!

    Lenders will usually require guarantees from each director if a company and each trustee if a trust. They may also require guarantees from unit holders in some cases.

    Having 8 people guarantee a loan increases the risk dramatically. If it falls over, all could fall – though very unlikely.

    If you are going to be doing  a few of these, then what about splitting it up a bit. Maybe have 2 people involved as guarantors for the first one, with a discretionary trust in there somewhere so all could get the profits. Then for the next one have a new entity with the next 2 people etc. In terms of borrowing you will get much further this way.

    if 8 people sign loan docs, then for the next loan you get, whether on your own or joinlty, the lender will assume you own the whole debt (cause you will have to pay if the other 7 won't), but they will only take into account 1/8th of the rental income (cause this is your share). So you can see this will quickly exhaust your borrowing cap.

    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 trajiktrajik
    Member
    @trajik
    Join Date: 2005
    Post Count: 102

    Some really good points there Terry. 

    The unit trust arrangement will definitely be the most tax effective and flexible.   As has been noted the main thing that needs to be sorted, is the decision making and dispute resolution process, which is likely with such a large group, and a tie breaker needs to be decided upon with an even number of equal votes.

    Are all members wanting an equal say, or do some just want to contribute equity?

    A written plan is a must.

    Good luck!

    Profile photo of kman1000kman1000
    Member
    @kman1000
    Join Date: 2007
    Post Count: 1

    In what form are the tax benefits realised? I believe there was a Victorian bill passed in response to a ruling pertaining to trust, where some form of "work-around" of tax was vindicated….

    I am particularly interested in finding more about obligations of the trustee (s), not including those constructed in the deed. Is there a act/regulation pertaining to the adminstration of trusts and responsibility of trustees? In particular with respect to cases of multiple trustees as to whether signatures from all trustees be required for, say, borrowing on behalf of the trust.

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

    Tax benefits of a trust result from the streaming abilities – you can usually distribute (with a discretionary trust) to the lowest income earner of a wide range of beneficiaries, this results in lower tax being paid.

    Trustees have a fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries of the trust. that means they must act in the best interest of the beneficiaries, not their own interests. The VIC ruling you mention may be related related to Land Tax.

    Banks impose their own requirements and nearly always will want all trustees to guarantee the loan. Sometimes they want the beneficiaries to guarantee as well. Once the loan is established it may be possible to enable just having one person's signature for redraws etc. Just like when you have a joint account, you can require both to sign, or either party to sign.

    Each state has legislation relating to Trusts, for NSW see

    TRUSTEE ACT 1925,

    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ta1925122/

    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 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.