buying an IP and negative gearing with no rental yield allowed?

Hi guys I have a very quick and simple question.

If I take out a loan to buy an investment property and I let my brother live in it and charge him no rent am I still allowed to claim this for negative gearing?

As I was told it is the purpose of borrowing funds to determine deductability and the property is negative gearing via interest of the bank each month and this property would be my investment in the long term purely by capital gains?

Cheers.
 
As I was told it is the purpose of borrowing funds to determine deductability and the property is negative gearing via interest of the bank each month and this property would be my investment in the long term purely by capital gains?

Cheers.

No, you can't. The deductibility rule is borrowing to earn assessable income. With no rent, there is no assessable income. Therefore, the interest and expenses are not deductible.
 
And further to Alex's post, if for example you decide to rent it out to your brother for $100/week and the "market rent" is $200/week, you can only claim 50% of the deductions. ie, proportioned based on market rent.
 
Where you have numerous properties is thre not a situation where loosing money on a property will benefit you?
 
Where you have numerous properties is thre not a situation where loosing money on a property will benefit you?

This is irrelevant. It's not a matter of you wanting to 'create' more losses.

In this context, the tax laws state that expenses are deductible only to the extent that they produce assessable income. There are further rules on private use and renting to related persons, etc. If dagg3r lets his brother stay for free in the property, the interest on the loan (and all other expenses) will not be deductible.

One could argue that many properties won't make assessable income for a very long time, but it's generally accepted that renting out an IP at market rates to an arms length renter means that interest on the loan (taken out to purchase the property), is deductible. Similarly, interest on a loan to buy shares that doesn't pay enough divs to cover the interest is generally deductible.

Can losing money on a property benefit you in the long run? Possibly, if the capital gains compensates for your losses. But there's risk involved, because future capital gains aren't certain. But that's irrelevant in terms of whether something is tax deductible or not.
 
If you charge no rent then you will not be able to claim anything relating to the property.

If you charge less than market rent, then my understanding is that you can only claim deductions up to the amount of rent received, i.e., no negative gearing at all.

If you charge no rent, then keep a very good record of EVERYTHING you spend on the property, as that can be added to the cost base to reduce CGT if/when you sell.
 
IT 2167

Letting of property to relatives

13. Where property is let to relatives the essential question for decision is whether the arrangements are consistent with normal commercial practices in this area. If they are, the owner of the property would be treated no differently for income tax purpose from any other owner in a comparable arms length situation.

14. If property is let to relatives at less than commercial rent other considerations arise. Unless the arrangements are comparable to those in FCT v Groser referred to earlier, the rent would represent assessable income. It would not necessarily follow, however, that losses and outgoings in relation to the property would be wholly deductible. The ultimate resolution of the matter would depend upon the purposes of the taxpayer in acquiring the property and in letting out to relatives.

15. In the Kowal case, for example, the Court found that the taxpayer had two purposes or objects in mind in acquiring the relevant property. One was to provide his mother with a good home at moderate cost. The other was to earn assessable income. The Court further found that the second purpose or object was the predominant one and, in the result, allowed income deductions for 80% of the losses and outgoings falling within sub-sections 51(1) and 67(1). In the Groser case, on the other hand, the Court expressed the view that, if the weekly rental had been assessable income, it would have allowed no more than $104 by way of deduction under sub-section 51(1) - the reason for this being that private or domestic purposes for the expenditure predominated over the purpose of producing assessable income.

16. As has been said earlier, decisions in these cases will ultimately depend upon the facts of each case. As a matter of experience it is unlikely that there will be sufficient information provided in return forms to enable a final decision to be made. In these circumstances, and as a working rule, income tax deductions for losses and outgoings incurred in connection with the rented property may be allowed up to the amount of rent received. Whether any additional deduction is to be allowed will depend upon the nature of any further information provided by the taxpayer.

Everything marg4000 said is correct.
 
What is the definition of 'relatives' for ATO? do they consider only close relatives? son,daughter,brother,sister,parents? or is your aunt's sisters son's brother in law is your relative? or the tony windsor is related to his labor cousine?
 
Back
Top