Convert PPOR to IP - husband buys wife out

We are wanting to turn our PPOR into investment property for lifestyle reasons. Unfortunately, being inexperienced when it comes to investing, loan structures, etc, we only owe $90,000 on the property (freestanding brick house in Prahran, Vic worth approx $1 mil). We are late starters but doing our best to learn how to do things better from this point forward.

We are both self-employed, husband earning very good income. Husband saves most of his disposable income. I use my disposable income to pay household expenses.

After reading lots of posts and chatting with some forum members, we are hoping the following is possible, legal and makes best use of our assets and income.

Would really appreciate comments on the following:

1.PPOR is owned jointly 50/50. Husband buys wife’s 50% share of freestanding brick house in Prahran worth approx $1 mil by refinancing current loan of $90 to $590k.
2.Husband pays Stamp Duty on the purchase ($25k on this newly purchased $500k share of the property – is this figure correct?).
3.Property now 100% in husband's name, with loan of $590k (IO/offset account).
4.Wife purchases new PPOR in her name only (using $500k received from husband plus cash savings of $260k). Will need to also pay stamp duty ($40 approx).
5.Once husband and wife move into new property, husband nominates the new PPOR as his principle place of residence.
6.Prahran property now becomes husband’s investment property.
7.Repayments on husband’s IP loan of $590k (IO with offset account) approx $39,000 per year. Rental of approx $700 pw ($36,400) would cover a good portion of IO loan. Other costs such as insurance, rates, maintenance, etc. would also need to be calculated.
8.Husband pays his "weekly earnings" into offset loan on IP (approx $500 pw drawn as “wages” from his company).
9.Wife continues to work and her earnings pay for all non deductible lifestyle costs, i.e. living in new PPOR that has no loan.

End goal: Husband has IP with 50% equity, negative gearing on his earnings and continues to save funds for future IPs in the offset account.
Wife would own new PPOR outright (asset protection of family home).
After looking at the pros and cons, we want to hold onto Prahran property rather than sell it to purchase new PPOR and a new IP. In a few years Prahran property will become cash positive, providing income when we retire. It also has potential to be further improved, possibly developed, etc. So has further investment potential. We understand we will have to pay CGT from the date it becomes an IP but only if we sell it at some point.

We are in our early 50s and plan to live in the new PPOR permanently (hoping to purchase small acreage Gisborne area up to $800k). Two grown up sons also want the country lifestyle and will continue to live with us rent free so they can make best use of income towards their own property investments.

Would really value thoughts of members. Can anyone see any pitfalls with the above? Sorry for longwinded post. There are quite a few posts though from others wanting to convert PPOR to IP. Hopefully my post will help other members who may be in similar position to us.
 
Hiya

You need to account for the half of the 90 k from the intial loan as being in the hubbys name already, and the other half being in ur name, thus the deductible would likely be 545.

If you want a higher ded amount you may want to consider a full sale to a Unit trust or the like

PLS PLEASE seek specialist advice on this, not just from an accounting POV but also the financing

ta

rolf
 
Hi Rolf,

Thank you so much for your reply. As you say, we certainly need to check everything thoroughly before proceeding in any way.

Is the basic concept of what we want to do heading in the right direction?

We want to be absolutely certain that we can convert current PPOR to IP, so any loan taken out will be okay legally as an investment property, i.e. to negative gear against the loan.

By the way we do have a family trust. Would that be of any help in this situation? Selling to trust - is that for asset protection purposes?

Of course, we will check with our accountant and we have been discussing things with a mortgage broker. Is there a particular type of accountant we should be talking to?

Again, thank you so much for your help.
 
dont quote me on this but

selling to trust should then enable you to have the whole loan tax deductible and then the whole 1m in cash sitting in offset account against your ppor and then any leftover against the offset of the IP
 
Hi Rolf,

Thank you so much for your reply. As you say, we certainly need to check everything thoroughly before proceeding in any way.

Is the basic concept of what we want to do heading in the right direction?

We want to be absolutely certain that we can convert current PPOR to IP, so any loan taken out will be okay legally as an investment property, i.e. to negative gear against the loan.

By the way we do have a family trust. Would that be of any help in this situation? Selling to trust - is that for asset protection purposes?

Of course, we will check with our accountant and we have been discussing things with a mortgage broker. Is there a particular type of accountant we should be talking to?

Again, thank you so much for your help.

We do them not quite once a week, but its garden variety vanilla stuff, you just need to make sure the numbers work, and its set up the right way.

ta'rolf
 
dont quote me on this but

selling to trust should then enable you to have the whole loan tax deductible and then the whole 1m in cash sitting in offset account against your ppor and then any leftover against the offset of the IP

yes............but requires a cross coll to achieve..........one of the rare times where xcoll is of benefit to the client

ta
rolf
 
BMan yes that would be the case if completely sold to a trust. Then ofcoarse you have Trust costs/obligations and higher stamp duty for the sale.

I would be inclined to either sell it, or follow the trust route. $500k is a LOT of money to have sitting against an IP when you could be holding on to it or using it elsewhere. To have a $1 million dollar investment, returning just $700 a week, to me isnt a very good return at all. Then you have to take holding costs off that.

How is the emotonal attachment to this property? tenants in general will not look after it like you do. So on top of the lowish rent you will have maintenance costs & all the other costs, which reduce the Return on Investment.

The only reason you are seeing it as becoming cash positive is because you are basing that on a LVR of 50% ($500k loan).

PS - We had a similar scenario and my wife sold her 50% to me. Wish I just sold the place and bought another on as high a LVR as possible. Dont forget your husbands high income will create a high CGT payable in the future.
 
Hi there Bman,

dont quote me on this but

selling to trust should then enable you to have the whole loan tax deductible and then the whole 1m in cash sitting in offset account against your ppor and then any leftover against the offset of the IP

Thanks for replying. It's taken me a while to get my head around the idea outlined in my initial post (LOL!). Am happy to explore all possibilities but due to inexperience with financial strategic planning, the learning curve is steep. Eager to learn though! From post further down, seems we would have to get x-coll loan for this type of set-up.

We will definitely have to get professional advice.

Thanks again for your comments - really helps me get an idea of various strategies.
 
Yes but selling to a trust will mean you have to pay the full stamp duty on the value of the property - which is $50k....not very nice!
 
Hi Brett,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

BMan yes that would be the case if completely sold to a trust. Then ofcoarse you have Trust costs/obligations and higher stamp duty for the sale.

I would be inclined to either sell it, or follow the trust route. $500k is a LOT of money to have sitting against an IP when you could be holding on to it or using it elsewhere. To have a $1 million dollar investment, returning just $700 a week, to me isnt a very good return at all. Then you have to take holding costs off that.

How is the emotonal attachment to this property? tenants in general will not look after it like you do. So on top of the lowish rent you will have maintenance costs & all the other costs, which reduce the Return on Investment.

The only reason you are seeing it as becoming cash positive is because you are basing that on a LVR of 50% ($500k loan).

PS - We had a similar scenario and my wife sold her 50% to me. Wish I just sold the place and bought another on as high a LVR as possible. Dont forget your husbands high income will create a high CGT payable in the future.

We do need to sit down with experienced property accountant/financial adviser to figure out the best strategy, as Rolf has suggested.

Husband does not want to continue working as hard as he is currently (getting too old and it's long hours, 7 days a week). That's the reason we were wanting to have the 50% LVR. Also, if he was to lose his current earnings (lots of jobs going down the gurgler at present and he is a subcontractor owner-driver) the rent would take care of the IP repayments.

The reason we want to keep the property as IP rather than sell is that it is in a blue chip area and is exactly the type of property people fall over themselves to purchase. Great location, freestanding, front and rear yards, close to Chapel Street, Hawksburn Shopping, trams, trains, buses. Also the type of people renting in this area are usually professional types, so hopefully will look after property.

With regard to husband's high income and its effect on CGT. This would only come into play if we sold the property (we plan to hold and pass onto sons once our time on earth is over). Also, wouldn't CGT be payable based on his tax rate at the time the property was sold. We don't plan to sell while he is earning the high income.

I suppose our main objective is to get out of the rat race, live in the country, retain what we believe is a better than average IP. We'd still have to pay stamp duty if we sold this property and purchased other IP.

Just thinking out loud. As mentioned, being inexperienced, it's not always easy for us to see the absolute best stratetic moves. Gotta learn it or pay someone who already knows. LOL!
 
I suppose our main objective is to get out of the rat race, live in the country, retain what we believe is a better than average IP. We'd still have to pay stamp duty if we sold this property and purchased other IP.

Yes people would kill to have a property in Prahran, especially an old Edwardian style house. I would never, ever sell good property unless there was a deal that I couldn't do without it. It's not like you would have difficulty selling Prahran even if you were desperate and needed the money fast...houses there get snapped up quickly if reasonably priced.
 
Hi again Brett,

I would be inclined to either sell it, or follow the trust route. $500k is a LOT of money to have sitting against an IP when you could be holding on to it or using it elsewhere. To have a $1 million dollar investment, returning just $700 a week, to me isnt a very good return at all. Then you have to take holding costs off that.

The only reason you are seeing it as becoming cash positive is because you are basing that on a LVR of 50% ($500k loan).

Thinking further about what you said earlier. If we did not sell to trust and did just sell to husband as per my original post, wouldn't that allow husband to still borrow again against the 50% equity on the IP if he wanted to? He could purchase something for $300k perhaps (unit/flat) and negative gear that as well. Once properties go up in value the equity would be greater on both properties and could refinance second IP to increase LVR and use some of this to pay down the larger loan on the first IP closer to time husband plans to stop work. Keep the other IP going as rent should also have increased by that time to help finance the larger loan).

That way we'd have two IPs. Have not crunched any figures, so above is very "subjective". Again, just thinking out loud.

Anyway, getting a bit ahead of myself - Pandora's box for sure.
 
Hi Aaron,

Yes people would kill to have a property in Prahran, especially an old Edwardian style house. I would never, ever sell good property unless there was a deal that I couldn't do without it. It's not like you would have difficulty selling Prahran even if you were desperate and needed the money fast...houses there get snapped up quickly if reasonably priced.

Thank you for your reply. Yes, that's how we feel about the Prahran property. We really don't want to sell this unless it would make the best sense to do so in relation to purchasing other investment properties as well as a new PPOR.
 
Hi Aaron,



Thanks so much. So, does this mean a "sale" from wife to husband of half share in the PPOR is also considered to be a "transfer", and does not stamp duty?

Many thanks.

Id get specific and specialised advice on this puppy.

We have briefly discussed b4 and I think Terry had found something that its ok..........

but

you need to consider if a transfer for love and devotion wont get in the way of the "commerciality" for ATO purposes of re gearing

I have no clue on either


t
arolf
 
Thinking further about what you said earlier. If we did not sell to trust and did just sell to husband as per my original post, wouldn't that allow husband to still borrow again against the 50% equity on the IP if he wanted to? He could purchase something for $300k perhaps (unit/flat) and negative gear that as well. Once properties go up in value the equity would be greater on both properties and could refinance second IP to increase LVR and use some of this to pay down the larger loan on the first IP closer to time husband plans to stop work. Keep the other IP going as rent should also have increased by that time to help finance the larger loan).

Yes he would be able to do that, again that extra equity borrowed would be in just his name. Thats great for negative gearing, not for positive, until he is out of work ofcoarse. Sounds like good news regarding the stamp duty though. Your thinking is correct, and its all about your preferences.

Im just always thinking of the return now (i.e the $700 a week less expenses from a $1m property) and the opportunity cost of that money.
 
In Vic you are luck as it can be stamp duty exempt on a sale from you to husband. There should be no CGT if it has been your main residence.

Just make sure you transfer it for full value or you may get into trouble with asset protection and tax deductibility.

Also consider updating your wills - You will lose control to some degree. What if you die first and then he leaves the house to his new young wife and bypasses your son? What if he dies first and you inherit his house and then leave both to your young tennis coach?

I am surprised more people in VIC don't do this (no not tennis but transferring between spouses).
 
Hi Terry,

Just make sure you transfer it for full value or you may get into trouble with asset protection and tax deductibility.

I wonder if you can clarify what you mean by "full value", "asset protection" and "tax deductability".

Many thanks.
 
Back
Top