All Topics / Help Needed! / starting out with smsf

Register Now for My Free Live Training Series!
Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Profile photo of floodyfloody
    Member
    @floody
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 5

    Hi all,

    Im new to this forum and have been loving the information offered. My wife and i are in the process of researching and starting our smsf. We have about 100k and want to invest in property. Ideally the goal is to get positive cash flow from property and build the portfolio. 

    Getting the positive cash flow in a property straight away seems it would be hard to do?

    Should we poor all of our super money into the one property to reduce the loan amount and go hard at paying that one off,or just give the minimum deposit and borrow the 80% with the thought of acquiring another property with remainder of super?

    Should we be starting off looking at properties in the under 200k category?

    Can someone recommend a good financial advisor that specialise in smsf's in Melbourne?

    It all feels allot to take in at the moment and hard to know what way to go.

    looking forward to your help.

    Floody

    Profile photo of Jacqui MiddletonJacqui Middleton
    Participant
    @jacm
    Join Date: 2009
    Post Count: 2,539

    Hi floody

    The most powerful part of purchasing property in super is the leverage (ie the ability to borrow money from the bank… which tenants will pay off).  No, it's not smart to pour all your funds into one property.  Better to split the pile of cash into 2.  Or purchase 1 now and another in a year when your fund has a wee bit more cash by means of your salary contributions.

    May I ask if you have started setting up your SMSF as yet?  If not, definitely prudent to use a provider to set it up that has set loads of SMSFs up before for the purpose of investing in property.  You would be alarmed to hear how often we see SMSFs set up incorrectly that stumble when they try to get finance for their first property.  Errors in SMSF setups just end up costing you down the track.

    Best Regards

    Jacqui Middleton | Middleton Buyers Advocates
    http://www.middletonbuyersadvocates.com.au
    Email Me | Phone Me

    VIC Buyers' Agents for investors, home buyers & SMSFs.

    Profile photo of Jacqui MiddletonJacqui Middleton
    Participant
    @jacm
    Join Date: 2009
    Post Count: 2,539

    Sorry forgot to answer your question.  Richard Taylor (https://www.propertyinvesting.com/user/qlds007)  is a Financial Advisor and specializes in SMSF setups nationwide.

    Jacqui Middleton | Middleton Buyers Advocates
    http://www.middletonbuyersadvocates.com.au
    Email Me | Phone Me

    VIC Buyers' Agents for investors, home buyers & SMSFs.

    Profile photo of floodyfloody
    Member
    @floody
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 5

    Thank you very much for your reply Jacqui, no we have not set up yet.

    We are still trying to research areas in Vic, and gather as much info we can.

    regards,

    Floody

    Profile photo of Nigel KibelNigel Kibel
    Participant
    @nigel-kibel
    Join Date: 2005
    Post Count: 1,425

    In my view i you buy in a self managed super fund you need to buy with the highest level of capital growth. If you buy a property at under $200,000 I think you will find that your growth is limited.

    Nigel Kibel | Property Know How
    http://propertyknowhow.com.au
    Email Me | Phone Me

    We have just launched a new website join our membership today

    Profile photo of Rick staRick sta
    Participant
    @rick-sta
    Join Date: 2011
    Post Count: 120

    I've also found that the costs of establishing the structure (custodian trust) and obtaining the finance can be quite a high percentage of the purchase price for a cheaper property, ie. sub 200k.

    Profile photo of floodyfloody
    Member
    @floody
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 5

    Thank you for your help. 

    Profile photo of Richard TaylorRichard Taylor
    Participant
    @qlds007
    Join Date: 2003
    Post Count: 12,024

    With 100K in Super you would probably be looking at a property of circa $300-400K rather than 1 for 250K.

    Even with the associated costs (and these have come down considerably over the last few years) you can still get good value with 100K in Super.

    We have set up a number of SMSF's for forum members over the last couple of months with a lot less than 100K in their rollover.

    Many ways of increasing your balance / lvr.

    Cheers

    Yours in Finance

    Richard Taylor | Australia's leading private lender

    Profile photo of Jacqui MiddletonJacqui Middleton
    Participant
    @jacm
    Join Date: 2009
    Post Count: 2,539

    Lenders offering SMSF loans dictate a minimum yield on properties.  As such this is one of the essential parameters you will need to work within.  Another such parameter is that your SMSF needs to have some reserve cash "just in case".  

    Jacqui Middleton | Middleton Buyers Advocates
    http://www.middletonbuyersadvocates.com.au
    Email Me | Phone Me

    VIC Buyers' Agents for investors, home buyers & SMSFs.

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

    You might want to consider going for as high an LVR as possible and then parking the cash of the SMSF in a 100% offset account attached to the loan. This will save the SMSF interest and keep the funds available. With SMSFs once you pay a loan down you cannot reborrow it.

    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 floodyfloody
    Member
    @floody
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 5

    Hi Richard,

    wouldn't this eat up too much of my super in the one basket after 20% down and closing costs? Wouldn't it greatly prolong the time until we could get the second?

    Kind regards,

    floody

    Profile photo of Richard TaylorRichard Taylor
    Participant
    @qlds007
    Join Date: 2003
    Post Count: 12,024

    Hi Floody

    Yes ideally i think in your situation i would be looking at something circa 250K however i was merely saying that you could go to 400K.

    Cheers

    Yours in Finance

    Richard Taylor | Australia's leading private lender

    Profile photo of floodyfloody
    Member
    @floody
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 5

    Thanks for your msg Richard I appreciate it greatly.

    Cheers Floody

    Profile photo of Jimmy86Jimmy86
    Participant
    @jimmy86
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 46

    Not sure if you have already made a decision yet or not @floody but you should probably look at getting a statement of advice done.  As you need to take into consideration a few more factors like your age, desired retirement age, liquidity required in your investment, returns required to achieve retirement goals, your family and their needs etc etc.

    as far as getting an official statement of advice (SOA) done, you could probably wangle your bank into a free one (if your not opposed to getting sold a loan or term deposit from them haha). 

    Otherwise there are a few good independent advisers around who specialise in SMSF advice. Look for one who is an accredited SPAA SMSF adviser… this means they have done extensive SMSF training.  Normally you can get statements of advice for around a grand. (but if to do with your SMSF can be payable by your SMSF).

    <moderator: delete advertising>

    Jimmy86 | Future Assist SMSF Specialists - Bris | Melb | Syd
    http://www.futureassist.com.au/setupansmsf
    Phone Me

    Self-managed super specialist administrators and advisers

    Profile photo of RedwoodRedwood
    Participant
    @redwood
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 340

    Hi floody. as you know there is no minimum balance for an SMSF and with $100k you have the opportunity to borrow up to 80% LVR for residential property and up to 70% for commercial property.

    With SMSFs, the objective should be for capital growth and therefore, i'm not sure you will find many properties around the $200k mark, and more likely to be around the $300-400k mark. 

    I have attached some information on property purchases below

    http://redwoodadvisory.com.au/smsf-property-investing-create-your-own-destiny/

    <moderator: delete advertising>

    Cheers,

    Redwood | REDWOOD | SMSF | PROPERTY | FINANCE
    http://redwoodadvisory.com.au
    Email Me | Phone Me

    SMSF - PROPERTY INVESTMENT - WEALTH CREATION AND FINANCE SOLUTIONS

    Profile photo of Richard TaylorRichard Taylor
    Participant
    @qlds007
    Join Date: 2003
    Post Count: 12,024

    Sorry Ivan have to disagree there.

    As SMSF Specialists we have assisted many a forum client to purchase a property for less than 200K.

    Capital Growth is one element however you cannot retire on capital growth unless you realise the asset which could (depending on whether you are pension or accumalation phase) trigger a CGT event.

    We focus on yields for our SMSF clients as certainly you can retire on income.

    100% loans are available to SMSF's if done by way of a related party loan which can certainly be a cheaper all round way of financing the deal.

    Cheers

    Yours in Finance

    Richard Taylor | Australia's leading private lender

    Profile photo of Rick staRick sta
    Participant
    @rick-sta
    Join Date: 2011
    Post Count: 120

    I'm a fan of the cashflow pathway too Richard, I think holding leveraged real estate that produces consistent income inside the smsf is a powerful strategy, especially for young pups like myself, I could still extinguish a 30 year mortgage before reaching retirement age. I do however plan to retire long before they grant me access to my super, so cash flow inside the fund is crucial for staying ahead of the banksters and their printing presses, avoiding dependance on CG (speculation), and reducing the likelihood of triggering a CGT event in retirement.

    In saying that, where do we draw the line in the pursuit of CF, in regards to regional/high risk locations, studios etc? 

    I would like to believe that, if a lender is willing to finance the deal and take the property as security, you could consider it safe enough for a SMSF, however I don't think this is always the case.

    Profile photo of Jacqui MiddletonJacqui Middleton
    Participant
    @jacm
    Join Date: 2009
    Post Count: 2,539

    If the banks and the ATO felt that capital growth was the most important factor to a SMSF, they'd be stipulating so in their lending criteria and investment restrictions.  Conversely, the banks demand a minimum yield, and have restrictions on postcodes they will lend to.  It is thus fair to say that the bank is more concerned with yield.  This is, after all, what will repay their loan and subsequently provide income for the SMSF members in retirement.  Capital growth is no good to you if:  the rent falls far below being able to cover the mortgage and holding costs…. or if the capital growth simply doesn't happen (and meanwhile you are paying through the teeth to prop up the mortgage)… or if you don't sell it.  The ONLY way to access capital growth in a SMSF is to sell the property. 

    Jacqui Middleton | Middleton Buyers Advocates
    http://www.middletonbuyersadvocates.com.au
    Email Me | Phone Me

    VIC Buyers' Agents for investors, home buyers & SMSFs.

    Profile photo of i-smsfi-smsf
    Member
    @i-smsf
    Join Date: 2013
    Post Count: 15
    floody wrote:

    It all feels allot to take in at the moment and hard to know what way to go.

    looking forward to your help.

    Floody

    Floody, have you proceeded yet? I would be interested to hear how you went and what option you decided to go with.

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)

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