Tax? What's tax? Why would you bother with that?
Can you send me your Depreciation Schedule?
- Thread starter fullylucky
- Start date
Slightly off on a tangent, but genuine question:
Question to Sanj and other developers - going by what Coasty put up above, would you actually be considered a "suitably qualified person" for the types of Dev's you do?
The Y-man
fullylucky does not take advice very well. Or at all.
Its like the "no valuation will be required" thread all over again
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86051
Its like the "no valuation will be required" thread all over again
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86051
I just read through that thread.... im surprised people even bothered posting in this thread. Kudos to the people who have posted in this thread and the no valuation thread. Your patience is astounding!
Well, where to start?
Probably with the admission.
Yes, unfortunately our sample report had not been updated in some time and had mention of an out-of-date ruling. This was an oversight and has now been fixed. It has not featured in our actual depreciation schedules since the ruling was changed. In our defence, we hadn't prepared for the contingency of someone trying to use Mr Example Person's report to do their own taxes. It doesn't happen a lot for reasons most people here can see are obvious.
As for the graph mix-up? I'm not sure that's a serious error. The information was correct; it was just in a different order and was still easy to interpret.
You say there are "a ton of mistakes" so I do encourage you to point the rest of them out (so far your count is at 1.5). We appreciate any feedback and welcome the opportunity to make any corrections.
One thing we won't be correcting, however, is the statement of "This Estimate Cannot Be Used For Taxation Purposes" in bold writing at the bottom of the page. That part is still correct.
If you would like to provide me with your quote number then I will happily look into this. A quote of over $800 might mean a few things: that you wanted us to inventory your furnishings, that you have a granny flat, or maybe multiple units on one title. If you have been misquoted then I will remedy that.
Let's leave this at the discretion of the other forum members, then.
Yes, but say that extra $630 ended up saving you more money because you had a proper depreciation schedule that maximised your deductions (e.g., because you'll probably undervalue your capital works). That could be 420 times the Portuguese chicken. You'll have all the peri peri your heart desires.
I'll definitely take a look but that's irrelevant: we charge our fee based on the property/properties in question and the work we do.
Again, I'd be happy to look at your quote. Some properties we don't need to inspect but I have trouble believing you were quoted over $800 for a single property that didn't require an inspection.
Give them a call and see what they say to this.
Yes, your accountant would need to do extra work to work out all your plant items, assign them a maximum value, research their effective lives, calculate both diminishing value (including low value pooling) and prime cost methods and collate the information, etc.
We are indeed a deluxe service and our results are testament to that.
No, I'm dealing with dollar values too. That extra $700 will save you money within one year.
Phew!
Lastly, we need to keep something in focus here, and that's a point other people who don't have a vested interest in depreciation have already made: your depreciation claim will not legally be recognised by the ATO. That is by far the biggest issue here.
Probably with the admission.
Yes, unfortunately our sample report had not been updated in some time and had mention of an out-of-date ruling. This was an oversight and has now been fixed. It has not featured in our actual depreciation schedules since the ruling was changed. In our defence, we hadn't prepared for the contingency of someone trying to use Mr Example Person's report to do their own taxes. It doesn't happen a lot for reasons most people here can see are obvious.
As for the graph mix-up? I'm not sure that's a serious error. The information was correct; it was just in a different order and was still easy to interpret.
You say there are "a ton of mistakes" so I do encourage you to point the rest of them out (so far your count is at 1.5). We appreciate any feedback and welcome the opportunity to make any corrections.
One thing we won't be correcting, however, is the statement of "This Estimate Cannot Be Used For Taxation Purposes" in bold writing at the bottom of the page. That part is still correct.
If you would like to provide me with your quote number then I will happily look into this. A quote of over $800 might mean a few things: that you wanted us to inventory your furnishings, that you have a granny flat, or maybe multiple units on one title. If you have been misquoted then I will remedy that.
I finished. Only took 1.5 hours.
Now I can use it for the rest of my life and also help others.
If anyone wants a "report" done post here your purchase price. and also how much of the stuff inside your property will break in the first year (in dollars). e.g. the data above is for a property purchased for $600k
Takes 3 seconds to generate.
Let's leave this at the discretion of the other forum members, then.
Yes, but say that extra $630 ended up saving you more money because you had a proper depreciation schedule that maximised your deductions (e.g., because you'll probably undervalue your capital works). That could be 420 times the Portuguese chicken. You'll have all the peri peri your heart desires.
I'll definitely take a look but that's irrelevant: we charge our fee based on the property/properties in question and the work we do.
Again, I'd be happy to look at your quote. Some properties we don't need to inspect but I have trouble believing you were quoted over $800 for a single property that didn't require an inspection.
Give them a call and see what they say to this.
Yes, your accountant would need to do extra work to work out all your plant items, assign them a maximum value, research their effective lives, calculate both diminishing value (including low value pooling) and prime cost methods and collate the information, etc.
We are indeed a deluxe service and our results are testament to that.
No, I'm dealing with dollar values too. That extra $700 will save you money within one year.
Phew!
Lastly, we need to keep something in focus here, and that's a point other people who don't have a vested interest in depreciation have already made: your depreciation claim will not legally be recognised by the ATO. That is by far the biggest issue here.
Last edited:
I hope fullylucky is the only one here who thinks his "report" (picture my fingers doing the inverted commas here) is suitable to use in his tax return. Reading his comments in this thread made me have a right chuckle and shake my head in disbelief. I see some pretty graphs but where is the depreciation schedule? Where is the list of depreciable assets, their depreciation rate, etc?
A purchase price of $600k yet he has a construction cost of up to $421k (assuming the property is brand new). Sounds very unlikely to be 70% of the purchase price (although it does happen).
What value is he using? The minimum? The maximum? The average? If with some massive stroke of luck his numbers are correct (which I'm sure are completely wrong), and he used the minimum amounts he could be duping himself out of $90,000 deductions over 40 years or $45,000 if he took the average.
What bothers me is that fullylucky thinks he is smart by doing it himself, getting a nice tax return and saving "42 Nandos burgers". Nothing against him personally, but I hope Mr Taxman comes knocking and gives him a little audit - just so he gets the realisation that he is so wrong in every way imaginable.
To everyone else - get someone who knows what they are doing to do a depreciation report (ie a Quantity Surveyor or similar who is a Registered Tax Agent). Save yourself the grief if you get an audit as well as paying back money plus interest and fines which would be well in excess the cost paying someone to do a report in the first place!
A purchase price of $600k yet he has a construction cost of up to $421k (assuming the property is brand new). Sounds very unlikely to be 70% of the purchase price (although it does happen).
What value is he using? The minimum? The maximum? The average? If with some massive stroke of luck his numbers are correct (which I'm sure are completely wrong), and he used the minimum amounts he could be duping himself out of $90,000 deductions over 40 years or $45,000 if he took the average.
What bothers me is that fullylucky thinks he is smart by doing it himself, getting a nice tax return and saving "42 Nandos burgers". Nothing against him personally, but I hope Mr Taxman comes knocking and gives him a little audit - just so he gets the realisation that he is so wrong in every way imaginable.
To everyone else - get someone who knows what they are doing to do a depreciation report (ie a Quantity Surveyor or similar who is a Registered Tax Agent). Save yourself the grief if you get an audit as well as paying back money plus interest and fines which would be well in excess the cost paying someone to do a report in the first place!
One other thing relating to the snide comments about Taxation Ruling TR 2009/4 which has been withdrawn - this gets withdrawn and resubmitted in July every year (I presume fullylucky is aware of this and has read and understood all 250 pages of this ruling and has researched into the relevant sections of the ITAA related to depreciation and capital allowances). The residential property portion of it hasn't changed in many many many years so if it was based on this ruling it would be completely correct (notwithstanding the fact that the BMT report you were looking at was an old report).
The thing with saving money, is it's paid for somehow.
In this case and in most cases it's paid for by two things:
1. Your own labour (which should have some value);
2. Increased risk, due to not being an expert nor experienced in whatever field you are using DIY; in this case the risk of a incorrect tax due to claiming depreciation that is not actually based on a depreciation schedule (just an estimate per year).
While starting at one investment property, the two items above start at minimal level, but as you expand and get more and more investments, both of the above increase.
OP - once you end up at 5,10, 15, or more properties, are you still going to proceed with this approach?
Do you also do your own conveyancing, building inspections, property management, repairs, pool safety certificates, water compliance checks, termite spraying?
When #2 risk strikes, will you also represent yourself in court?
In this case and in most cases it's paid for by two things:
1. Your own labour (which should have some value);
2. Increased risk, due to not being an expert nor experienced in whatever field you are using DIY; in this case the risk of a incorrect tax due to claiming depreciation that is not actually based on a depreciation schedule (just an estimate per year).
While starting at one investment property, the two items above start at minimal level, but as you expand and get more and more investments, both of the above increase.
OP - once you end up at 5,10, 15, or more properties, are you still going to proceed with this approach?
Do you also do your own conveyancing, building inspections, property management, repairs, pool safety certificates, water compliance checks, termite spraying?
When #2 risk strikes, will you also represent yourself in court?
OMG!!
I haven't seen that thread before.
I'm seriously lost for words.
Knock yourself out
http://somersoft.com/forums/search.php?searchid=8517395
I am still not sure if he is just trolling or for real?
Buys property for 760, values at 630k still wants to go ahead by crossing his ppor. Bad building inspection, negotiates 2.9k off as cash back after settlement. No disclosure to lender. Wants to put a clause in tenancy agreement that dodgy back stairs cant be used to avoid liability. Trys to create another bedroom thats not compliant. It goes on. Alot of very good advice thats just ignored
I am hoping that sale fell through for his sake.
If he is advised something from anyone on ss he doesnt want to know about it.
Just lost for words. Kudos to all the regulars who keep posting on every thread.
So he's lost $127,100 on a purchase ($130k loss minus the $2.9k cashback), no wonder he wants to make it back by not paying $500 for a depreciation schedule.. at this rate it will only take 254 properties saving $500 on each schedule to make back the $127k
So this must truly be a Somersoft regular who is just posting under another nickname to take the **** and stir us up?
Any guesses?
LOL! Shows I haven't been around much lately.
Train wreck about to happen or troll? Hmmmm.........
He would want to be fully lucky when he invests like that and makes up figures for a depreciation report. ATO is probably looking at his IP address right now!
Well just when I thought I would get some work done today I went and grabbed some popcorn and had a read of the "no valuation" thread.
My head hurts now
My head hurts now
fullylucky, here is an impression of me if you wished to become a client of mine and I came to visit you, then realised who you were.
