If anyone has any SOLID evidence relating to the Banks attitude/policies towards financing NRAS properties in their current "straight freehold structure" I would be most appreciative. Are the Banks up to date with these changes? Has anyone just gone through the process recently? Why would a sellers agent be cloaking "side agreements" into contacts if financing such properties is apparently no longer an issue?
HI all, im new to property investing so please bear with me.
I have taken a look at it, and can see samples they show of someone with a 50k salary. I can see that the calculations are based off the interest rates back in 2009 at 5.74%. Now that they are approx 7%, would I be correct in thinking the NRAS developments will no longer be cashflow positive?
Hi there,
If you go to our website, http://www.buildingassets.com.au , and download the information memorandum, you will see three examples in South Australia that are all cashflow positive. Rgds,
Rob
Rob it appears to me in the examples the +CF is smoke and mirrors. The figures on the first example dont account for the borrowing cost or opportunity costs the of $ 59,000 deposite. Especially on an LVR of 90% the interest rate will be higher then 6.25%. You should account for a least 7% probably more. Interest on 425k @ 7% is 30k Income even with grant is 25k. Even with a loan of 365k the cash flowing in wont match the cash flowing out. I also notice you have to factor in tax deduction at a rate of 41.5% to make this appear CF+. and also count capital gains as cash flow. AS a stand alone investment I dont think it stacks up. There are numerous more efficient ways to minimise tax without deliberately making a loss. Another poorly implemented scheme from the Krudd government
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
