Am I in a good position to buy my first IP in Adelaide ?

Would like to purchase a new 3 bedroom property in the southern suburbs of Adelaide (Seaford or Aldinga)


I have $130k colateral in my own property.
Earn $1400pw gross
Mortgage $1600pm

Any advice would be appreciated on negative gearing and how much I would have to contribute to my 1st IP after tax breaks. I know obviously it depends on the loan size and rental return but was hoping someone might be in a similar situation and could offer some tips/advice ?

Would a new or existing property be more advantagious ?

Regards,
Ian
 
Hi Ian,

Welcome to the Somersoft Forum.

Im in Perth, a govt employee (not for too much longer) earning less than you and personally have a Multi $Million Property Portfolio spread around Australia.

This is a post that describes my investment strategy involving Villas & Townhouses. It may be of interest to you.

The capital growth averaging (CGA) strategy I employ utilises a regular purchasing cycle similar to what Dollar Cost Averaging is to the sharemarket. The major underlying principle to its success is it relies on your "time in" the market, NOT "timing" the market, and never never sell.

So in other words it does not matter whether you buy at the top of a boom or at the bottom, just so long as you purchase good quality, well located property in high density areas (metro area capital cities), at or below fair market value, on a regular basis. I've been purchasing an IP per annum and we're currently 8 years into this 10 year plan.


I've been purchasing new or near new property over older style property for several reasons. The main ones being (in no particular order) -

1/ To maximise my Non-Cash depreciation deductions

2/ To minimise my maintenance & repair costs

3/ More modern & Attractive to tenants - thereby minimising potential vacancy rates

4/ Ask a higher rent - thereby Maximising yields


Without getting into the "which is better debate, houses or Units??", I prefer to purchase Townhouses & Villas with a 30% or greater land component thereby eliminating multi story units or high rise apartments, for several reasons.
The mains ones being (in no particular order) -

1/ lower maintenance & upkeep for the tenant

2/ lower purchase or entry level into a Higher capital growth suburb area

3/ a rapidly growing marketplace (starting both now & into the future) wanting these type properties. This is due the largest group of people to ever be born (being the Baby boomers and Empty nesters) starting to come into their retirement years. They will be wanting to downsize for the following main reasons - lifestyle & economic.

4/ greater tax advantages & effectiveness thus maximises cashflow.

5/ able to hold more individual properties spread across your portfolio - thereby minimising area over exposure risks by not holding all your eggs in only a few baskets, so to speak


I look to buy in areas with a historic Cap growth of 7%pa and/or are under gentrification. I look to where the Govt, Commercial, Retail, private sectors are injecting money. This ultimately beautifies the area which attracts people so they move in creating demand. I have found this works extremely well if you are looking for short to medium term capital growth so as to leverage against and build your portfolio faster.

Getting back to CGA, as the name suggests it averages out the capital growth achieved on individual properties with your portfolio throughout an entire property cycle, taking into account that property doubles in value every 7-10 years - thats 7%pa compounding.

The easiest way to explain what Im meaning by this is to provide a basic example taking into account that all your portfolio cash flow will be serviced via Wages in the accumulation stage, Rental income, the Tax man, an LOC and/or Cash bond structure, and any other form of disposable income.

For ease of calculation lets say we buy a property for $250k, so in 10 years time its now worth $500k. Now lets say we do that every year for the next 7-10 years. Now you can quit the rat race.

So in year 11 (10 years since your 1st Ip) you have 250K equity in IP1 you can redraw out (up to 80%) Tax free to fund your lifestyle or invest with.

In year 12 you do exactly the same but instead of drawing it from IP1 you draw it from IP2.

In year 13 you do the same to IP3, in year 14 to IP4, etc etc etc. You systematically go right through each property within your portfolio year by year until you have redrawn from each property once.

So what do you do after that I hear you say ?? hmmm......well thats where it all falls into a deep hole.

You have to go get a JOB.......... nope only joking!

You simply go back to that first IP you purchased as its been 10 years since you drew upon it first time around and its now doubled in value ($1M) yet again. So you complete the entire cycle once again. In fact chances are you never drew each property up 80% lvr maximum. So not only have you now got an entire property cycle of growth to spend you, you still have what you left undrawn in it first time round that's compounded big time. Now your wealth is compounding faster than you can spend it! What a problem to have!!

Getting back to what I said in my opening paragraph - it does not matter where you buy within a property cycle, just so long as you do buy. This is because you will not be wanting to redraw upon it until 10 years later after its achieved a complete cycle of growth.

Well thats the Basic Big Picture of CGA. Once its set up its a self perpetuating, TAX FREE Income Money Machine.

Ian, I hope this has helped you.
 
Last edited:
Hi Rixter

"So in year 11 ( 10 years since your 1st Ip) you have 250K equity in IP1 you can draw out (up to 80%) Tax free to fund your lifestyle or invest with."

How does that work? I presume you mean that you borrow against the equity. But if you use that for lifestyle, the interest would not be tax deductible. Over a decade or so you would build up a large non-deductible debt and have to service the interest payments.

Or am I getting it wrong?
Marg
 
Hi Rixter

"So in year 11 (10 years since your 1st Ip) you have 250K equity in IP1 you can draw out (up to 80%) Tax free to fund your lifestyle or invest with."

How does that work? I presume you mean that you borrow against the equity. But if you use that for lifestyle, the interest would not be tax deductible. Over a decade or so you would build up a large non-deductible debt and have to service the interest payments.

Great question Marg.

Interest on funds borrowed for income producing purposes is tax deductible.

Interest on funds borrowed for lifestyle funding is not tax deductible.

CGA is a LOE (Living on Equity) strategy and as such you do not pay income tax in the first instance to write deductions off against.

With LOE you are already funding your lifestyle and existence without any need for tax relief which is your worst case scenario from a cash flow perspective anyway.

In other words, the interest on the loans used for living isn't tax deductible, however the growth in your portfolio is far greater.

Some times we as investors can become too focussed with whats tax deductible and whats not , that we lose sight of the forest for the trees.

LOE is a complete paradijm shift in thinking away from the conventional cash flow model most poor & middle class people learn from an early age and are accustomed to all of their lives.

Food for thought.

Marg I hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
I think I am getting my head around it.

So basically you keep drawing equity for living expenses plus paying the interest on loans already used for living expenses, but with 10 IPs the growth in equity will continually outstrip the growth in the living expenses loans?
Marg
 
I think I am getting my head around it.

So basically you keep drawing equity for living expenses plus paying the interest on loans already used for living expenses, but with 10 IPs the growth in equity will continually outstrip the growth in the living expenses loans?
Marg

Correct Marg. Not only will it outstrip your lifestyle expense redraws, but it will outstrip all your total portfolio debt. :)

Plus dont forget you will also have 7-10 years worth of rental incomes that have been cumulatively compounding available towards servicing your debt too.

In other words your portfolio is appreciating in value faster than you are redrawing upon it, providing you have structured the right sort of growth properties along the way to do so.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
Rick,

Have you used equity or cash deposits as a tool along the way ?

If one were to use equity LOC to helpmake cashflow easier, in order to acheive the goal of funding lifestyle in year 11, they woud obviously want to keep ean eye on not over capitlising their expenses... If using the 10 properties example you outlined below, is it safe to be mtged up to 80% + whilst building ?
 
Have you used equity or cash deposits as a tool along the way ?

I use 105-106% (of purchase price) OPM borrowed against existing equity. When I first started out I borrowed this all in one loan x-colled , then as that purchased property grew in value so that the loan had become 80% LVR I got the bank to un-x-coll. I was able to do this for the first few properties due to my purchasing criteria that exposed me to good short to mid term CG.

Later on I started funding my property deposits and purchasing costs from an Investment LOC, then financed the remaining 80% of the purchase via a new IP loan.

If one were to use equity LOC to helpmake cashflow easier, in order to acheive the goal of funding lifestyle in year 11, they woud obviously want to keep ean eye on not over capitlising their expenses... If using the 10 properties example you outlined below, is it safe to be mtged up to 80% + whilst building ?

I have always looked to maximise my yields initially either at purchase and/or manufactured via value adding after purchase. As such any cash flow short fall is minimised and either funded via available disposable income or capitalised in investment LOC.

My investment LOC has a 80% LVR credit limit with around 60% LVR balance which provides me ample buffer for SANF.

I have never exceeded 80% LVR in my purchases and as such never incurred LMI.

I hope this helps.
 
It certainly does help, thanks...

I take it I should be learning more about adding value at purchase time also...

When I created & posted a s/s showing my current situation & then using equity to accumulate properties using LOC / mtges & rents only, while keeping the LVR under 80% throughout the whole journey, I got asked who I would expect to lend me money to do this (about a month or so ago) - obviously I expected the banks to do this (?) !! I'm not that wrong am I ?
 
When I created & posted a s/s showing my current situation & then using equity to accumulate properties using LOC / mtges & rents only, while keeping the LVR under 80% throughout the whole journey, I got asked who I would expect to lend me money to do this (about a month or so ago) - obviously I expected the banks to do this (?) !! I'm not that wrong am I ?

I suggest you seek the services of an IP savvy mortgage broker to run your situation past.

What you are wanting it do sounds fairly straight forward and nothing out of the ordinary.

Who was asking you and what did you do?
 
For ease of calculation lets say we buy a property for $250k, so in 10 years time its now worth $500k. Now lets say we do that every year for the next 7-10 years. Now you can quit the rat race.

So in year 11 (10 years since your 1st Ip) you have 250K equity in IP1 you can redraw out (up to 80%) Tax free to fund your lifestyle or invest with.

In year 12 you do exactly the same but instead of drawing it from IP1 you draw it from IP2.

Rixter, can I ask a question? If you are purchasing an IP every year, but only drawing on the equity of previous IPs after a 10 year growth cycle, how do you fund the purchase of IPs 2 - 10? Do you save the deposit for the next IP out of your wages each year?

I can't get my head around this bit, because in order to buy more IP's I have to access the equity in the IPs I already have and by year 11, they will probably all be fully borrowed against.

How did you avoid this situation?
 
Rixter, can I ask a question? If you are purchasing an IP every year, but only drawing on the equity of previous IPs after a 10 year growth cycle, how do you fund the purchase of IPs 2 - 10? Do you save the deposit for the next IP out of your wages each year?

I can't get my head around this bit, because in order to buy more IP's I have to access the equity in the IPs I already have and by year 11, they will probably all be fully borrowed against.

How did you avoid this situation?

HI Natmarie,

Initially I borrowed against the equity in my PPOR for the first few IP's and later on from those earlier purchased IPs. :)

As your portfolio grows with each subsequent purchase (providing you bought good growth properties) your compounding CG across your portfolio provides ample equity to continue purchasing.

Its like a snowball rolling down a mountain - starts off small and slow but as it grows the frequency of its growth intensifies.

I hope this helps.
 
So in other words it does not matter whether you buy at the top of a boom or at the bottom, just so long as you purchase good quality, well located property in high density areas (metro area capital cities), at or below fair market value, on a regular basis. I've been purchasing an IP per annum and we're currently 8 years into this 10 year plan.

This worked spectacularly well during times of rising prices, but I fail to see how it would work in a down market.

There are only so much cashflow loss you can absorb, and with capital losses as well, how can you keep borrowing or pull money out to pay interest bills?

Plans that worked during the last 10 years and the gains that covered up the inherent risks in the strategy may send people broke if attempted over the next 10 years.

Theoretically, taking your advice they buy 1 negatively geared IP a year for 3 years, then have negative equity (no LOC) and no more free cashflow. What do they do then?
 
Theoretically, taking your advice they buy 1 negatively geared IP a year for 3 years, then have negative equity (no LOC) and no more free cashflow. What do they do then?

Thats what a purchasing criteria is there for - to maximise growth & yield so as to continue purchasing, underpinned by a solid foundation & structure from the initial outset.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
HI Natmarie,

Initially I borrowed against the equity in my PPOR for the first few IP's and later on from those earlier purchased IPs. :)

As your portfolio grows with each subsequent purchase (providing you bought good growth properties) your compounding CG across your portfolio provides ample equity to continue purchasing.

Its like a snowball rolling down a mountain - starts off small and slow but as it grows the frequency of its growth intensifies.

I hope this helps.

Thanks Rixter - I don't have a PPOR so I didn't even think of that (duh). I guess I'll have to treat IP #1 as a PPOR and use it as my cash cow.
 
Its time for number 2

Hi All,

We're back in the market from IP no#2. Our first IP (Morayfield Brisbane) has done rather well over the last 12 months. Got it for $270K (got a $290K loan to cover expenses), and just got the bank evaluation back and its now $320K (conservative). We've got some savings and have some equity in our current property and I'm waiting on the bank to give us our pre-approval amount. I think we should get approx $400K.

We currently live in a 3 bd unit in Lidcombe Sydney, the initial idea was to buy a house and move into it as we have three kids under 6 years, and they need the space. But given we can’t get much for $400K for a house in the areas we want, we're getting ready to purchase IP number 2.

From what I've researched I believe we should buy in either Brisbane and/or Adelaide. I plan to buy a few reports (reside) next week to confirm these findings. However what I seek advice is on is if I can be given a few pointer in this form of some suburb names in the above capital cities that I should zero in on.

Also, I'm planning to move out of our 3br unit, lease it out as an IP and lease a house for ourselves so we get what we need and also have (potentially) 3 IP’s on the market (Morayfield, Lidcombe, yet to buy property). With this plan, from a financial point of view is it a bad move? I know this depends on individual circumstances but just as a general rule of thumb is this something you would do if you were in my place.
Any/all feedback will be most appreciated.

Trev
 
Back
Top