new v's old IP

[alpina]

hi all,

whats the consensus here?

i know from an accounting pt of view it makes a lot of sense to buy new or at least post '87 for max depreciation benefits.

other than lower cost, are there any advantages to buying old?

thanks,

julie

 

[Mr Ed]

Alpina,

As you’d know you shouldn’t buy anything just for it’s tax benefits. The property should be able to stand up on its own and the tax benefits taken as an added bonus. (no pun intended)

Any other advantages of buying an existing property….

You can add equity via renovation
Redevelop the site (knock down & build units for example)

There are still tax benefits available from a QS (Bought a 1929 original QLDer settled 2 days before 30th June got $2800 worth of immediate deductions in the property alone)

Location can often be better in an old property, not always but there are more older places in great locations then there are new.

New offers less repairs in the first 10 years (paint, HW units, carpet ect)

From an investors point of view I believe one should take a business approach. Weigh up what the property has to offer. With that I don’t think new can be better than old other than Tax wise.

Mr Ed

PS Just an after thought, once you have a bunch of new properties and pay no income tax would you still buy new?

 

[alpina]

reason id have no income tax by then would probably be because i would no longer be earning any real income (all going into expenses), so probably not - lol

julie

 

[stirling]

I think Mr Ed is talking about building depreciation. ie a tax deduction of building without the negative cash flow.

That why one property of 4% depreciation (ie tourist apartment) is good to start with, but keep buying and your tax will drop to 0.

Stirling

 

[gailh]

In many inner city areas, period housing is in greater demand, and appreciates better.

G