• Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Hello and welcome to Aussie Stock Forums!

To gain full access you must register. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds to complete.

Already a member? Log in here.

The future of Australian property prices

Discussion in 'Business, Investment and Economics' started by Joe Blow, Nov 15, 2009.

  1. sptrawler

    sptrawler

    Posts:
    10,166
    Likes Received:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    From memory i don't think there is a lot of exposure by SMSF, the rules were only relaxed during Gillards reign, so I don't think it had time to get a lot of traction.
    I could be wrong, but i'm sure I read it was a small number somewhere.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2019
  2. sptrawler

    sptrawler

    Posts:
    10,166
    Likes Received:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    That is going to be a big can of worms, people I spoke to when I was working, who had rental property didn't have a clue as to the limitations.
    They just claimed everything, against the rent, for the full year.
    When in actual fact you can only claim against the period it was rented.
    This will be even more pronounced, with airbnb style renting.

    The ATO will have to employ more auditors.:D
     
  3. satanoperca

    satanoperca

    Posts:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    229
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    And lets not forget all those AirBnB properties where the owners havn't declared the income and in some cases were dumb enough to claim the expenses and not the income.

    I have a friend who has been quite happy AirBnB their property out for 3 years (they live in it), they are in the top tax bracket, when I suggested they should declare the rental as income I got the response, it is my home why should I. When I informed them that the ATO is now linked to the AirBnB database and they would have to pay >45% tax on the income, they said it wasn't worth it.

    I will assume this would account for a large number of AirBnB properties
     
  4. sptrawler

    sptrawler

    Posts:
    10,166
    Likes Received:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Yes and when they go to sell their house, they will be subject to capital gains tax, if they have airbnb'd a room in their PPR.:xyxthumbs
     
  5. basilio

    basilio

    Posts:
    6,609
    Likes Received:
    791
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    The issue of expensive cladding risks in recent housing apartment constructions is still on the march.
    This story expands on that topic and has a table showing the location of 500 plus housing developments around Melbourne currently being investigated for inflammable cladding.
    If there is an average of 30 units per location that would be 15,000 plus owners with a big bill coming up.

    Two towers, two fires - but both signed off by same engineering firm
    Clay LucasMarch 14, 2019 — 10.47am
    • Send via Email
    The fire safety engineering firm found by a tribunal to be most to blame for a 2014 flammable cladding blaze in Docklands also signed off on Neo200, the Spencer Street apartment tower that caught alight in February.

    Last month the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal found that safety engineering company Thomas Nicolas, whose sole director is Con Nicholas, was responsible for the largest portion of the almost $6 million it will cost to reclad the Lacrosse apartment tower on Latrobe Street.

    https://www.canberratimes.com.au/po...by-same-engineering-firm-20190312-p513np.html
     
  6. Humid

    Humid

    Posts:
    380
    Likes Received:
    120
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    Would a bad fund manager be someone who suggested relying heavily on franking credits?
     
  7. sptrawler

    sptrawler

    Posts:
    10,166
    Likes Received:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Not for the last 20 years.:roflmao:
    Also the industry funds will still be relying heavily on them, it is just their mates are screwing over the little guy, for them.:xyxthumbs
     
    qldfrog likes this.
  8. Smurf1976

    Smurf1976

    Posts:
    8,381
    Likes Received:
    1,319
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    I would define a bad fund manager as anyone who is charging their clients fees for managing their funds but who has in practice simply tracked an index or other benchmark or, worse still, has under performed it.:2twocents
     
    Bill M, qldfrog and satanoperca like this.
  9. qldfrog

    qldfrog

    Posts:
    2,131
    Likes Received:
    289
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    A good fund manager? Easy
    Fee should be only a percentage and maybe high one of the fund overperformance vs the index
    Say will get half of the overperformance over the asx inc dividends over a period :quarteror year..
    Easy to understand or implement
    If you know one or some, tell me.
    If there are none, it means simply no fund can be trusted to beat the indexes
     
    Bill M and Smurf1976 like this.
  10. Bill M

    Bill M Self Funded Retiree

    Posts:
    1,899
    Likes Received:
    181
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    And this is the reason why a lot of people have a SMSF. You set it up with someone like Esuperfund and pay your $1300 a year all in no matter what your balance is. Then you can take out multiple Term Deposits and buy ETF's with low MER's and there is no skimming for ongoing "Admin" fees. Maybe those Industry Super Fund CEO's don't like the fact that it is very easy to do, really it is.

    Why pay a .64% ongoing fee for the total of your super balance when you can do it yourself? Here is the difference in fees for a $500,000 Super Account

    abc Super Company = $3,200

    ESuperfund (or similar) = Just your yearly $1300 - $1500 fee no matter how big your balance is. Some people only want Term Deposits and ETF's. To me it sounds like these Big Wig CEO's are getting worried about something that has nothing to do with them. Why question how individual wants to run their own Super Fund?
     
    qldfrog likes this.
  11. Bill M

    Bill M Self Funded Retiree

    Posts:
    1,899
    Likes Received:
    181
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    ^^^Whoops, so sorry, for some reason I thought I was posting in the Super Cash Cow thread. I am off topic and if mods want to move or delete the above post please go ahead.^^^
     
  12. Zaxon

    Zaxon The voice of reason

    Posts:
    164
    Likes Received:
    79
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    They really should drop the requirement for having to spend $1300 for compliance. If you can do you own taxes for free, and comply with tax law, then you should be able to manage your own SMS for free, and comply with super law. That would open it up to far more people who really only want to do simple things like Term Deposits and ETFs.
     
    sptrawler likes this.
  13. Junior

    Junior

    Posts:
    988
    Likes Received:
    271
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Hi Bill M, admin for an SMSF can be very time consuming, as I'm sure you know. Many retirees don't want the hassle.

    Also, retail super funds are getting cheaper and cheaper. Many have a cap on the admin fee, which can be as low as $2,500 per annum....for larger balances this can start to make more sense than the burden of an SMSF. You have access to shares, TDs, ETFs. Don't have to do a tax return, get an audit etc. and can view all your reporting online.
     
    Humid likes this.
  14. qldfrog

    qldfrog

    Posts:
    2,131
    Likes Received:
    289
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Junior, you have a point but it is a given that people with higher balances will subsidise the ones with 10 or 20k when in a fund.
    I am with sunsuper with low balance of 300k or so..minimum contribution as i do not trust gov now, even less in 10y+..
    But i i not want to pay for surfer ads or getting below market returns on my cash options
     
  15. Humid

    Humid

    Posts:
    380
    Likes Received:
    120
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    I payed 80k in tax last year.......am I subsidising franking credits?
     
  16. Junior

    Junior

    Posts:
    988
    Likes Received:
    271
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    This is true of most Industry funds, where fees are a flat percentage of your balance, but retail (bank) funds often have a cap on the admin fee, and you can choose to invest in direct shares, TDs etc. where you don't pay any fund manager fees.
     
  17. sptrawler

    sptrawler

    Posts:
    10,166
    Likes Received:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    No, but you are probably paying for four on the dole, while we import 457 cleaners for the camps you live in.:xyxthumbs
     
  18. Zaxon

    Zaxon The voice of reason

    Posts:
    164
    Likes Received:
    79
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    My super allows for direct share buying, but the brokerage is very high, far higher than what I'm charged outside of super. You'd think that a large super fund would have the leverage to negotiate better brokerage rates? No. Their rates are more expensive.

    In addition, they charge you a monthly fee just for having the direct share facility, which isn't charged if you don't have it. So if you add up all those expenses, and then compare them to the fees for holding one of their funds, it can be difficult to work out how the expenses of these options really line up.
     
  19. Humid

    Humid

    Posts:
    380
    Likes Received:
    120
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    Nah
    Nah mate kiwis
     
    sptrawler likes this.
  20. Junior

    Junior

    Posts:
    988
    Likes Received:
    271
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    I do these comparisons for work. You're spot-on, they make it very difficult to compare like-for-like, but it can be done. Brokerage rates through most retail funds are around $30 or 0.10% per trade.
     
    qldfrog and Zaxon like this.
Loading...

Share This Page