Recent content by Chan and Naylor

Hi ScottyB 1. Not everyone needs a Trust and the initial consultation helps determine whether a Trust is the right vehicle for the client. We find that only around 60% of clients need a Trust whether that's a Discretionary or Unit or Hybrid or Blind or Bare or a Property Investors Trust®...

What we learned from the ATO about Hybrid Trusts... Over the last 3 years of negotiating with the ATO to achieve an ATO approved Product Ruling for our Property Investor Trust ® (PIT®) we have learned a few things that we thought was interesting to share. Firstly some Background information...

Hi Aaron_C The rule against perpetuity are not breached. The use of specific legislation and case law fully supports the ability for our Property Investor Trust® not to vest. Marco

We earlier received the above private message in response to our recent posts. As you are all well aware there has been some considerable discussion and somewhat negative rhetoric in this forum concerning Chan & Naylor Property Investor Trust®. While these threads have laid dormant for some...

Thanks Terry :)

Dear Melbournian, We do have an office in Melbourne, please follow this link for office and contact details. Regards, The Chan & Naylor Team

PROPERTY INVESTORS TRUST®" (PIT®) Achieves ATO Product Ruling This post has been removed as an identical post has been posted elsewhere

Chan & Naylor Property Investors Trust® (PIT®) achieves ATO Product Ruling CHAN & NAYLOR "PROPERTY INVESTORS TRUST®" (PIT®) Achieves ATO Product Ruling PR2011/15 Difference between Product Ruling and Private Ruling The Australian Taxation Office has released Product Ruling PR2011/15 which...