Investing in property offers a variety of strategies, each with its own unique benefits and challenges. Understanding the different ways you can structure the purchase and ownership of your property assets is crucial for maximizing your returns and minimizing risks.
Seeking professional guidance from an experienced property investment expert is highly advisable when determining the best structures for your specific needs. Property investment is not a “one size fits all” proposition; different structures have varying tax repercussions and advantages depending on your investment goals and methods.
Different structures come with distinct tax repercussions. Some may be more advantageous than others based on how and why you’re investing in property.
The way you obtain finance and the security your asset base enjoys as it evolves and provides an income into retirement largely depends on how you structure your property investment portfolio. Getting this right from the start can save you from costly and complex untangling later on.
Individual ownership is the most common structure for residential real estate, offering simplicity and ease of transaction. However, it exposes your assets to litigation risks and claims from creditors.
Tax Perspective: Individual property ownership allows investors to benefit fully from negative gearing, especially if they are in a higher income tax bracket. However, income tax applies to your portfolio when it transitions to positive cash flow in retirement.
Joint ownership can be structured as either:
Joint Tenants: Often used by couples, where each owns a half share of the property. If one dies, full entitlement automatically transfers to the surviving owner. Income and expenses are split evenly, making it a basic but not always effective structure.
Tenants in Common: Each party owns a specified portion of the property. Ownership transfers according to the deceased’s Last Will and Testament.
Companies and family trusts are more complex and costly to establish and administer but offer significant benefits for serious investors.
Trusts: Control of the property investment is transferred to a trustee for the beneficiaries’ benefit. The trustee distributes profits at its discretion, with beneficiaries paying tax at their marginal rates.
Corporate Trustees: Provide greater control over profit distribution and succession planning.
Advantages: These structures are ideal for high-income earners and those in high-risk professions to protect assets from litigation.
Disadvantages: The costs of establishing and maintaining these structures can be significant. Trusts or companies cannot be created solely for tax avoidance, and family trusts can’t distribute losses, negating the potential to claim negative gearing on real estate in this structure.
SMSF are gaining a lot of ground in Australia…where workers have historically relied on traditional managed super funds to do all the heavy lifting when it comes to providing a retirement income.
When the 2008 GFC demonstrated that you couldn’t rely on others to plan for your future financial – even in something as seemingly benign (in terms of risk/return weight) as superannuation, more people began taking the reins of their own ‘nest eggs’.
Now the industry is worth over $500 billion in this country and the SMSF structure is proving increasingly popular among property punters, largely due to the attractive associated tax benefits, including:
In the accumulation phase, your SMSF can purchase income-producing property (using borrowed capital up to an LVR of 70% and fund balance of $120,000 plus), with any profits taxed at a capped rate of 15%. Unlike traditional tax rates applied to property related income at the investor’s own marginal rate.
You also enjoy limited CGT liability, where any gain realised on property owned for 12 months or more by the SMSF is taxed at a maximum rate of 10%.
When you reach retirement and your portfolio starts to provide an income to replace your weekly paycheck, your fund converts to its pension phase. At this time, the income from your super becomes entirely tax-free; meaning no CGT liability and no income tax at all for SMSF owned property assets.
Your SMSF can claim negative gearing and depreciation benefits associated with property holdings (depending on the type, age and state of the asset), thereby reducing the 15% tax rate further and potentially creating a tax free environment in some instances.
Of course, the payoff is that you cannot claim any negative gearing or depreciation entitlements to offset your own personal income tax if your SMSF owns the property investments, plus these structures can be quite convoluted and costly to establish and administer.
Although limited recourse borrowing has opened up the SMSF structure to more mum and dad investors, allowing funds to borrow capital for the acquisition of residential or commercial property, you still need a minimum balance of $120,000.
Plus, your fund needs sufficient liquidity to repay the loan, as well as maintain the investment. And it’s worth noting that you’re restricted in terms of what you can do with property held by SMSFs, in terms of redevelopment for instance.
Choosing the right property investment structure is essential for optimising tax benefits, securing financing, and protecting your assets. Professional advice tailored to your specific circumstances can help you navigate these complexities and achieve your investment goals.
Please enter your details in order to book your 1-on-1 Strategy Session
Almost there: please enter your details and tell us where to send your Free Report: