Somersoft Property Investment Forums  

Go Back   Somersoft Property Investment Forums > Finance, Accounting, Tax, Legal > Accounting and Tax

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 27-11-2006, 05:20 PM
Thrawn Thrawn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 69
Thrawn is on a distinguished road
CGT Main Residence Exemption (6 years)

Are you allowed to claim expense deductions on a rented out property under Main Residence Exemption status ?

Eg,

Buy a house in January 2007. Claim FHOG, Stamp Duty concessions, etc. Move in to the house immediately.
Move out of house in July 2007 (not to another PPOR). Rent it out (pay tax on rent income). Start claiming interest expenses on the mortgage, depreciation, repairs, rates and the like.
Sell or revalue in July 2013 and this date will become the new CGT cost base ?

In the meantime, not purchase another house as PPOR of course.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 28-11-2006, 05:21 AM
DaleGG's Avatar
DaleGG DaleGG is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,235
DaleGG is a glorious beacon of lightDaleGG is a glorious beacon of lightDaleGG is a glorious beacon of lightDaleGG is a glorious beacon of lightDaleGG is a glorious beacon of lightDaleGG is a glorious beacon of light
Hi and welcome to the forum

Yes, you can still claim interest, rates, insurance, repairs, and depreciation on both the chattels and the building (if appropriate) against your rental income even though the property is still your PPOR for CGT purposes.

This is because the costs are incurred in earning your income and the tax law says that as a result, they can be claimed.

I hope that you hang around for a while and contribute your knowledge, experience and opinions for us all to benefit whilst you are learning from the collective here.

Dale

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
Are you allowed to claim expense deductions on a rented out property under Main Residence Exemption status ?

Eg,

Buy a house in January 2007. Claim FHOG, Stamp Duty concessions, etc. Move in to the house immediately.
Move out of house in July 2007 (not to another PPOR). Rent it out (pay tax on rent income). Start claiming interest expenses on the mortgage, depreciation, repairs, rates and the like.
Sell or revalue in July 2013 and this date will become the new CGT cost base ?

In the meantime, not purchase another house as PPOR of course.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 28-11-2006, 07:10 AM
dave99 dave99 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 448
dave99 will become famous soon enough
You can claim deductions against your rental income regardless of the PPOR status. The PPOR status only affects whether you pay CGT.

For CGT, you can live away from your PPOR for up to six years before the PPOR exemption "expires". Also, if you move back in at any time, then move out again, the six years starts again.

Of course you can only have one PPOR at a time, so if you move out, the new place you live in cannot be your PPOR.

For more info: http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/co...tent/36887.htm

- Dave99
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 28-11-2006, 10:16 AM
Thrawn Thrawn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 69
Thrawn is on a distinguished road
Sounds like a great way to go for young guys like me starting "property investment" then. You can make use of your PPOR CGT exempt status from as early as possible before you start a family and have to move out of your parents house. Much better than a straight IP from day one.

The lack of deductibles and rent income for the first 6 months will be offset by the FHOG and stamp duty concessions. And you have 6 months to do minor renovations to improve the rent yield, increase the equity value and do a top-up on your loan for future "investment expenses". Plus you get a feel of "owning your own home" and living in it, for a short while anyway
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 29-11-2006, 12:33 AM
alexlee alexlee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Away
Posts: 11,553
alexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
Sounds like a great way to go for young guys like me starting "property investment" then. You can make use of your PPOR CGT exempt status from as early as possible before you start a family and have to move out of your parents house. Much better than a straight IP from day one.
I disagree. You could just buy an IP and never sell. You'll never have to pay CGT then. If you were a young person without a family, I'd suggest going for IPs first. Personally, I think the 6 year exemption isn't that useful because 6 years is a pretty short time when it comes to property.

Say you buy a property for $200k. In 6 years the propety goes up 50% to $300k (pretty standard). You pay zero CGT instead of 20% (assuming you make up to $100k salary + $50k CG). i.e. you save $10k. Sounds great, until you buy another IP for $300k which costs you more than $10k in stamp, etc. In any case, buying the IP in a trust could allow you to pay very little CGT if you have say a non-working spouse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
The lack of deductibles and rent income for the first 6 months will be offset by the FHOG and stamp duty concessions. And you have 6 months to do minor renovations to improve the rent yield, increase the equity value and do a top-up on your loan for future "investment expenses". Plus you get a feel of "owning your own home" and living in it, for a short while anyway
Why not just do renos, etc to an IP? You still get to claim deductions.

You can always 'save' your FHOG for your actual PPOR. That feelign of 'owning your own home' is emotional only, as most of it is actually owned by the bank (though you control it, which is the important thing, anyway).

I'd suggest not getting emotionally attached to property that you 'control' (and, give the LVR, do not really own). Clouds judgement, IMHO.
Alex
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 29-11-2006, 11:23 AM
Thrawn Thrawn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 69
Thrawn is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexlee View Post
I disagree. You could just buy an IP and never sell. You'll never have to pay CGT then.
Well, sooner or later, someone has to pay CGT (unless the law changes). Even when you die, your benefeciaries will have to pay the CGT if they sell the property. The interesting thing though, is CGT is a tax that can be deferred pretty much forever as long as you don't sell it. So that 6 years worth of CGT that you accumulate now, is in effect a very small amount of tax in 30 years when you sell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexlee View Post
If you were a young person without a family, I'd suggest going for IPs first. Personally, I think the 6 year exemption isn't that useful because 6 years is a pretty short time when it comes to property.
When you're young, 6 years is a long time. A lot can happen in that time, I might decide to start a business requiring a lot of extra capital, might move overseas, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexlee View Post
Say you buy a property for $200k. In 6 years the propety goes up 50% to $300k (pretty standard). You pay zero CGT instead of 20% (assuming you make up to $100k salary + $50k CG). i.e. you save $10k. Sounds great, until you buy another IP for $300k which costs you more than $10k in stamp, etc.
You actually save $20k in CGT on that example. CGT will hit mostly on the top bracket (40% odd), so $100K CG * 40% tax * 50% discount = $20k. There'd be a few things that will raise the cost base (agent fees, stamp duty, etc), but there's also depreciation deductions which will lower the cost base. If in 6 years I'm still staying with IPs, it'd be unlikely that I'd sell the property and buy another one. I can just revalue the property at that point start the CG clock, right ? (or move back in and reset the 6 year exemption clock).

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexlee View Post
In any case, buying the IP in a trust could allow you to pay very little CGT if you have say a non-working spouse.
Trust structures looks very interesting to consider. But since it'd be a few years at least before I can start seeing the benefits, the complexity and costs of setting up one from the start is probably not worthwhile. Its much more worthwhile when you have lot of IPs though, but it'd be quite a long while yet until I get there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexlee View Post
You can always 'save' your FHOG for your actual PPOR.
Alex
Since the value of FHOG doesn't seem to increase over time, its probably best
to take advantage of it as early as possible.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 29-11-2006, 12:25 PM
dave99 dave99 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 448
dave99 will become famous soon enough
Perhaps the beneficiaries could hold on to the property too, and their children and so on down the line. No CGT ever! But if great-great grandson wants to sell 50 years later - wow that's a big CGT bill!

- Dave99
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 29-11-2006, 01:59 PM
trajik trajik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toowoomba, Qld
Posts: 36
trajik is on a distinguished road
what about buying in your name for 6 years as PPOR exemption, then setting up a trust and transferring to the trust.

No CGT, only stamp duty, and you still have effective ownership
__________________
tax@guardianaccounting.com
www.guardianaccounting.com
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 29-11-2006, 02:46 PM
carlau carlau is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 90
carlau is on a distinguished road
So what you setup a Trust account and sell the property and pay no CGT?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 29-11-2006, 05:08 PM
alexlee alexlee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Away
Posts: 11,553
alexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
Well, sooner or later, someone has to pay CGT (unless the law changes). Even when you die, your benefeciaries will have to pay the CGT if they sell the property.
Not true. If they inherit from you, they get it at a cost base equal to the value as at the date of death. All capital gains racked up during your lifetime are in effect tax free. If you inherit from someone and sell immediately (at about the same value as at the time of death) CG is minimal. Beneficiaries only pay CGT on the CG that occurs between inheritence and THEIR death. During which they can use all the equity the previous person built up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
When you're young, 6 years is a long time. A lot can happen in that time, I might decide to start a business requiring a lot of extra capital, might move overseas, etc.
True. My own experience (I'm 29 and it is now more than 6 years since I bought my first IP) as a young investor is that PRECISELY because things change you want to get some good assets under your belt early. Time is the investors friend and the younger you are, the more % of your salary you can save because you have fewer necessities. I've been working overseas for the last 6 years and I've also been investing in IPs. Now that I'm at the stage when I'm thinking about buying my own place, starting a family, etc (I'm staring down the gullet of 30) I'm REALLY glad I have those IPs.

If you start a business requiring a lot of capital, wouldn't you prefer to have a lot of IPs happily appreciating to give you the capital you need? Many of my friends are wondering how they're going to get a deposit for their PPOR, and in the past they've asked me why I was putting myself on the hook for such big mortgages. I now have no concerns about getting together a deposit to buy my own PPOR AND continue investing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
You actually save $20k in CGT on that example. CGT will hit mostly on the top bracket (40% odd), so $100K CG * 40% tax * 50% discount = $20k. There'd be a few things that will raise the cost base (agent fees, stamp duty, etc), but there's also depreciation deductions which will lower the cost base. If in 6 years I'm still staying with IPs, it'd be unlikely that I'd sell the property and buy another one. I can just revalue the property at that point start the CG clock, right ? (or move back in and reset the 6 year exemption clock).
I got my figures wrong.

Depreciation is deducted at your full marginal rate (say 40%) and you pay it back at half 20%, so you're ahead there. As you say, if you're going to stick with IPs after 6 years, you're unlikely to sell. In 6 years, if the CG is bad the CGT exemption rule doesn't help much. If it's good CG, believe me you're not going to give up IPs. If you hit anything LIKE the cycle we've had in the last 6 years (and I've only averaged 7-8% a year) you're going to be hooked.

You could move back in, but you've said things change. I didn't want a house when I was 23 but I do now. Thinking 'I can always move back into it' limits your thinking to 'I'm only going to own one property'. Not the best attitude if you want to build a big portfolio.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
Trust structures looks very interesting to consider. But since it'd be a few years at least before I can start seeing the benefits, the complexity and costs of setting up one from the start is probably not worthwhile. Its much more worthwhile when you have lot of IPs though, but it'd be quite a long while yet until I get there.
Two main benefits to trusts: asset protection and income streaming. While it's -ve geared you could get the same effect holding property in your own name, so there is no immediate benefit. Asset protection is more of an insurance policy: I may not claim insurance every year but I happily pay the premium because I want the protection.

As for income streaming, if you get to the point where you use the benefit of, say, CG distribution to the lowest tax payer (when you sell), it's too late to change entities. You can't move ownership to a trust later without incurring stamp duty (based on the market value when you sell, which hopefully will be much higher than the cost now). Entity selection should be done FIRST.

Re lots of IPs.... you'd be surprised. After your first couple of IPs (which will be very hard to accumulate) the CG really takes over and it jumps exponentially. If you build it diligently, you'll have lots of IPs before you know it. That's why IPs are so attractive: fairly safe leverage.
Alex
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 29-11-2006, 05:09 PM
alexlee alexlee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Away
Posts: 11,553
alexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlau View Post
So what you setup a Trust account and sell the property and pay no CGT?
You pay no CGT when selling your own PPOR, but the trust will have to pay stamp when buying it from you.

Which begs the question: if you plan to keep the property anyway, why not just buy it in the trust in the first place? And if you plan to keep it, why transfer it to the trust? Asset protection is fine, but you can just gear the thing up to the hilt to decrease equity in your personal name.
Alex
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 29-11-2006, 06:15 PM
trajik trajik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toowoomba, Qld
Posts: 36
trajik is on a distinguished road
A couple of things, there is no CGT on inherited property if sold within 2 years of inheritance and the property was the deceased PPOR.

The cost base for beneficiaries of a PPOR inheritance is either the market value at death if the property was originally purchased prior to early 1985, or original cost base if purchased after early 1985.

Transferring the property to a trust would be beneficial to gain the CGT exemption, and then the new cost base would be the sale value, of course only if a trust hadn't been used originally.
__________________
tax@guardianaccounting.com
www.guardianaccounting.com
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 29-11-2006, 07:22 PM
alexlee alexlee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Away
Posts: 11,553
alexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond reputealexlee has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by trajik View Post
A couple of things, there is no CGT on inherited property if sold within 2 years of inheritance and the property was the deceased PPOR.

The cost base for beneficiaries of a PPOR inheritance is either the market value at death if the property was originally purchased prior to early 1985, or original cost base if purchased after early 1985.
That would imply if a PPOR was purchased after 1985 and is passed onto a beneficiary, then it would be far better to sell within 2 years than to hold onto it, since CGT exemption disappears after 2 years?
Alex
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 29-11-2006, 07:56 PM
trajik trajik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toowoomba, Qld
Posts: 36
trajik is on a distinguished road
Exactly,

Even if you went and bought another property straight away after selling, the savings in CGT may be substantial, but stamp duty must be considered on the new property.
__________________
tax@guardianaccounting.com
www.guardianaccounting.com
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 31-12-2006, 10:21 AM
GIDDO's Avatar
GIDDO GIDDO is offline
travelling member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: travelling around Oz now
Posts: 726
GIDDO has a spectacular aura aboutGIDDO has a spectacular aura aboutGIDDO has a spectacular aura about
Bump

Am I right in saying that an individual can claim a 50% discount on CGT on any sale of an investment property? (if purchased in an individuals name)

And that same individual can claim a total exemption of CGT on their own PPOR?

And if bought in a company name, the property is subject to CGT at 30% from the first dollar?

Doesn' t the CGT exemption make it pretty attractive to own a PPOR that is going to appreciate nicely; keep it a few years and then go again??

I don't mean that we should not have IPs as well; but I am asking whether people think a decent sort of PPOR, bought well, is a good idea, as long as you are prepared to swapp PPORs every 5 years or so??

Can someone knowledgable confirm this please?

Kind regards and happy new year to all from GIDDO
__________________
Looking for opportunity in the outer northern Brisbane suburbs.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 31-12-2006, 10:29 AM
geoffw's Avatar
geoffw geoffw is offline
Untitled
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Queanbeyan NSW
Posts: 21,237
geoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond reputegeoffw has a reputation beyond repute
Giddo

The 50% exemption for an IP is if you've held it for more than a year.

There is a definite huge CGT advantage to owning your PPOR.

But then, you can't offset interest and holding costs against your tax on a PPOR.

That may or may not offset the CGT advantage.
__________________
Our hobby shop- market Mexican food in Canberra.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 31-12-2006, 02:49 PM
julia julia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Beachmere Qld
Posts: 485
julia has a spectacular aura aboutjulia has a spectacular aura aboutjulia has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Sell or revalue in July 2013 and this date will become the new CGT cost base ?

The cost base does not reset at 2013. The cost base resets only once, when you move out in July 2007. From that point forward is just the period that is exempt from CGT as your PPOR so if you did not sell until July 2014 without moving back in 1/7th of the gain using the July 2007 cost base plus all the add ons, is taxable (section 118-192).

Quote:
Not true. If they inherit from you, they get it at a cost base equal to the value as at the date of death. All capital gains racked up during your lifetime are in effect tax free. If you inherit from someone and sell immediately (at about the same value as at the time of death) CG is minimal. Beneficiaries only pay CGT on the CG that occurs between inheritence and THEIR death. During which they can use all the equity the previous person built up.
This is only applicable if the house was the deceased residence at date of death or a pre 85 house (section 128-15). In this case you have up to two years to sell with not CGT (section 118-195). If it was not the deceased home and post 85 then inherits at the deceased cost base (section 128-15).
You can’t use your PPR exemption if the property is held in a trust (section 118-110)

Julia
www.bantacs.com.au
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-01-2007, 03:06 PM
speedbump speedbump is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: East Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 15
speedbump is on a distinguished road
In reference to 6 year rule I was under the impression that if you moved back in (for 2 years) the 6 years does not start again, however it is added on so you still have 6 years in total but over 8 year period.



Speedbump

Last edited by speedbump; 01-01-2007 at 03:07 PM. Reason: bad spelling
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-01-2007, 11:22 PM
julia julia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Beachmere Qld
Posts: 485
julia has a spectacular aura aboutjulia has a spectacular aura aboutjulia has a spectacular aura about
Speedbump,

Section 118-145 (2) .... You are entitled to another maximum period of 6 years each time the dwelling again becomes and ceases to be your main residence.

Julia
www.bantacs.com.au
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-01-2007, 01:07 PM
speedbump speedbump is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: East Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 15
speedbump is on a distinguished road
Thanks Julia,

That is the benefit of asking questions, you generally get an answer.

Speedbump
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 05:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © Somersoft Financial Services Pty Ltd