I have a friend that is currently purchasing a vacant block of land. His intention is to to build on the land in several years( 3-4) as he is currently working in a remote area.
He has had to pay Qld Stamp duty at the rate of investment property as there is no residence attached to the land therefore negating the primary residence deduction.
However it would appear from researching rulings on the ATO that he is not able to cliam any tax benefits as he is not generating an income of the property.
Can anyone help me with following questions:
1. If the Qld state govt recognise the property as investment, hence the highest rate of stamp duty emposed on the buyer of the vacant land then why can't the buyer claim the stamp duty and all other relevent related costs of the property as tax deductions ( this would also include future interest paid on loan)
2. As the owner has an intention to build the property in several years ( not six months)and therefore make it his priciple residence in the future would my friend be able to challenge the defintion of primary residence (remembering that he us currently working in a remote location).
For your information the price of land is $130000
Stamp duity at investment rate : $3335
Stanp duty at primary place of residence : $890.
Can some body please advise me on how one govt department can recognise the land as an investment when it come to taking money off the buyer ( stamp duty)but whe it comes to giving it back in the form of deductions the other Federal department does the opposite.
He has had to pay Qld Stamp duty at the rate of investment property as there is no residence attached to the land therefore negating the primary residence deduction.
However it would appear from researching rulings on the ATO that he is not able to cliam any tax benefits as he is not generating an income of the property.
Can anyone help me with following questions:
1. If the Qld state govt recognise the property as investment, hence the highest rate of stamp duty emposed on the buyer of the vacant land then why can't the buyer claim the stamp duty and all other relevent related costs of the property as tax deductions ( this would also include future interest paid on loan)
2. As the owner has an intention to build the property in several years ( not six months)and therefore make it his priciple residence in the future would my friend be able to challenge the defintion of primary residence (remembering that he us currently working in a remote location).
For your information the price of land is $130000
Stamp duity at investment rate : $3335
Stanp duty at primary place of residence : $890.
Can some body please advise me on how one govt department can recognise the land as an investment when it come to taking money off the buyer ( stamp duty)but whe it comes to giving it back in the form of deductions the other Federal department does the opposite.