Fencing isn't eligible plant & equipment.
Claiming up to $20 000 immediate deduction
- Thread starter Burramys
- Start date
Fencing isn't eligible plant & equipment.
I was just going off this, although I know it's not until July '16.
But in addition, from July 2016, farmers will be able to claim an immediate, total deduction for any spending on fencing and water infrastructure.
They will also be able to claim depreciation on fodder storage over three years.
"I'm really proud of the initiative to give instant asset write-off on fencing," Treasurer Joe Hockey said.
"A lot of farmers pretend that it's just repair of fencing when they're putting up fencing.
I doubt the personal use portioning has changed.
But the difference is you used to have to work it out each year.
But if you can now claim it all at once, you'd have to forecast it, instead of having an actual log book to refer to. How would that work? Would it be ok to use a forecast based on historical data?
Tick. Primary producer. That's different.
Yes but if you're claiming it all this year, how can you predict how much of it you will use for business in the following 5-10 years?
Sole trader and partnership yes. Companies and trusts, no.
Its a little worrying to see people considering that these benefits apply to rental property owners. None of the budget changes affect rental property taxation, unless of course you are one of those very rare people who operate a rental property business.
My favorite summary of the budget is always the NTAA's summary. I have had to refer to it several times in the past few days, especially for relatives who have been saying that the Government was abolishing FTB Part A.
http://ntaa.com.au/files/Budget_2015-16_update.pdf
As I mentioned in another thread, there is a product called the GPS logbook. I suggest people who need to keep a logbook but hate doing so (like me) use that instead since it tracks your location via GPS, prints out the log in an ATO compliant format and (this is the best part) you can keep it running. That's the best part because for log book purposes you need to keep a record for 12 continuous weeks so if you keep the log going, you can cherry pick which 12 weeks to use (though the tax office does say the period needs to be representative of the type of travel you do.
https://www.gpslogbook.com.au/
The taxpayer may need to prepare a new logbook where their pattern of use is considered to have changed. That said, there is no obligation as such.
Common example where a new logbook may be needed is where a different employer or job role exists. While travel to from clients may be part of the new job etc and covered by an allowance etc the pattern of use and business use % may need to be recalculated. However changing a vehicle alone isn't a reason to force a new logbook. within the 5 years.
The taxpayer may need to prepare a new logbook where their pattern of use is considered to have changed. That said, there is no obligation as such.
Paul, putting a side the recent budgeting changes, my understanding in relation to the general period a log book is required to be kept for tax purposes is 3 months. Is this still the case?
Almost right. 12 continuous weeks. I had a client proudly show me his logbook he hated completing for a 11 week period.
https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Inc...Calculating-your-deduction/Keeping-a-logbook/
Let me share a idea a person suggested today. Its so stupid.....
Buy a $20K car today. Then trade it in for a $40K car tomorrow paying a further $20K. Then sell trade it a few days later for a $60K. You can then claim $20K X three right ??? So you can buy a $60K car and its 100% deductible. Right ???
Are you serious was my reply. No that wont work...The very adamant person suggested his mate had been told by his accountant it would work. Ummm. No it wont.
So I broke it down:
- The trade in from the first car would be 100% assessable (since there is no book value for the car w/off). So deduction = assessable. A zero sum event;
- The second car has a cost of $40K and the net price is not its cost. So its not eligible; and
- The Third care (see comment about second car)......Sounds like a scheme to me. A scheme to pay thousands in stamp duty and govt charges.
I might go home.
Buy a $20K car today. Then trade it in for a $40K car tomorrow paying a further $20K. Then sell trade it a few days later for a $60K. You can then claim $20K X three right ??? So you can buy a $60K car and its 100% deductible. Right ???
Are you serious was my reply. No that wont work...The very adamant person suggested his mate had been told by his accountant it would work. Ummm. No it wont.
So I broke it down:
- The trade in from the first car would be 100% assessable (since there is no book value for the car w/off). So deduction = assessable. A zero sum event;
- The second car has a cost of $40K and the net price is not its cost. So its not eligible; and
- The Third care (see comment about second car)......Sounds like a scheme to me. A scheme to pay thousands in stamp duty and govt charges.
I might go home.
Similar threads
